Zula Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991422640
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3233040675
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$330,258
Expenses
$309,723
Assets
$52,370
Liabilities
$2,106

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELDAD M ALFI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BAR ASOLIN (ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $60,183 total reported compensation
  • ALLIDA CLARK (ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR): $40,516 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The zula project is a non profit organization that serves the community in the advancement of knowledge and education of mental and physical well being for the promotion of improved personal health as well as other purposes beneficial to the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, the organization hosted 276 events at its current venue, zula den, serving more than 3,555 participants with programs that promoted mental, physical, and emotional wellbeing. Of these, 29 events were offered free of charge to ensure accessibility. Activities included a variety of healing practices as well as educational workshops on sustainability. Through its one-for-one model, each paid experience funded access for someone in need, further extending the program's community impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.9%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 22.8%; rating input score 23
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 119.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 46.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.9% of revenue deployed · 22.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.