Archewell has made loss of £500k

[Viviennemary]

I don't quite get how those foundations work. But can't be great that It's made a loss of more than half a million pounds. Article about it in the Daily Mail.

But didn't they donate only around half the amount to projects that they did in 2021?

I think I saw something on another thread that showed the breakdown as around $1.2m donated in 2022 vs $3m in 2021.

I assumed that's because they've got so much less coming in they're trying to save it so they don't go bust too quickly, but if their argument is that they're spending their reserves and not trying to raise more cash, surely they should be donating similar amounts each year?

Do you ask these questions of The Royal Foundation, Harry used to be part of that but of course now it's Will and Kate. They had a 50% drop in income last year, and spent £5 million more than they brought in.

They might have realised there really isn't that much in it for them. They're not the Obama's. And aren't really part of the royals now. They are adrift. And not really gaining in popularity with all this latest publicity. That's putting it mildly.

Again, do you think the same of Will and Kate? 50% drop in donations and an overspend of £5 million. I think its just a case of some not understanding how this kind of thing works.

Surely for both it's more the cost of living crisis meaning people just can't donate and not a measure of their popularity anyway.
Anyone who would donate to archewell in the first place won't hear any wrong think about them, they are mh stans.

It’s not as if they couldn’t expand some of their donations, they partnered with David Oyelowo GEANCO and provided 2500 girls with ruck sacks, school equipment and menstrual products. All very worthy but a drop in the ocean. The publicity was probably far more impactful than a short term supply of pads. The foundation is sort of stuck without at attempt to actually fund raise so they can centre their own causes. Fundraising puts a worth on their popularity and I’m not sure that would be good. It goes back to why would a donor give to archewell who will support GEANCO when it could cut out the middle man and expenses and give to GEANCO.

Its just that its a normal way for foundations to operate, theres no need to sit on a pile of cash that could be put to use or use reserves to fundraise when you don't need to. Most people agree that Archewell is so far likely to be funded primarily by them, again that is fairly common.

if you know the 50% drop then you must know that was because the earth shot separation

@Cakester but this isn't a thread about the Royal Foundation.

why would a donor give to archewell Again, its more likely to be their own money. Lots of foundations are like this.

It's a means of comparison and as it was Harrys previous charitable foundation, entirely relevant.

That doesn’t fall in line with the report from the telegraph

I know thats what the report says, although earthshot still accounted for 62% of income. What do you mean though, 'that was because', how did it impact that?

Lets look at another year for the royal foundation then:

The total income for the year to 31 December 2019 was £6.7m, a decrease of 15% on 2018 (£7.8m)

I am not criticising the royal foundation, it is an example of a similar foundation Harry and Meghan were part of that similar things happen to, to demonstrate this is quite normal and the media are only harping on because its Harry and Meghan.

I can’t stand those two, but their costs really aren’t that ridiculous. I’m
actually surprised it’s that low.

What happened to the annual £100k stipend they got from the NAACP? Do they still give an Archewell prize of £100k? Talk about regifting!

This is the announcement for 2023, they announce in February of each year.

NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said, "We are honored to award and support Nabiha Syed in her mission to make democracy work for all. While technology has made everything more accessible and everyone more connected, it has the potential to cause tremendous setbacks for civil rights, as we have witnessed in recent years. We need to support the greatest minds in tech who are developing equitable platforms and holding corporations accountable, and that is exactly what Nabiha Syed is doing. We are grateful to The Archewell Foundation and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have been tremendous partners in the fight to advance civil and human rights across the tech sector."

https://naacp.org/articles/naacp-and-archewell-foundation-announce-2023-digital-civil-rights-award-recipient

That is a good point. I give to one charity by monthly DD, I give to other things ad hoc e.g. yesterday it was the local food bank, last week it was for the Christmas toy appeal. I feel a connection to those things and I chose to support them directly. I assume it must be more cost efficient as well, if I gave the same amount to Archwell could they donate 100% of it to causes or would some go to their costs.

You can't donate to archewell like that. I am similar, I have a couple of regular donations to small grassroots orgs, and occasionally I see one others are publicising and donate to it if its something thats important to me. The archewell site links you directly to the charities they support if you want to donate, they don't take your donations.

I think it is unfair to critique a charity / organisation / initiative in its infancy.

William’s ‘life work’ with homelessness - he has another 40 years to live, I expect, so ridiculous to write the initiative off after a few months. same with Archewell.

So they are just signposting? What do the millions get spent on/where do they come from? I have no idea how this works.

It's a foundation, they typically award grants to existing grassroots charities. Its a way for wealthy people to donate, and if they have a platform, raise awareness of their chosen charities- much like the royal family do. Usually foundations like this are from a family's own wealth. I am happy when wealthy people give large sums to areas that need it, usually most people support giving to charity!

I understand it’s in its infancy but surely it can’t be a success now. For the massive amount of publicity it gets and how much they are in the news it’s not bringing much in. How much really are they going to bring in going forward?

It doesn't need to bring much in, as they injected a large amount at the start, as is typical of foundation like this. It's more of a vehicle for them to donate their own wealth, like many other foundations of its kind. There were no fundraising expenses because they don't ask for donations publicly, like a normal charity does. Its a foundation which primarily grants to their chosen charities.

Usually foundations like this are from a family's own wealth. I am happy when wealthy people give large sums to areas that need it, usually most people support giving to charity!

Foundations are primarily tax loopholes for the ultra wealthy. The ultimate goal is to retain more of their own money compared to if that same sum were declared as income and they had to pay the legal tax rate on that. Biggest giveaway are foundations with only one or two huge benefactors, most likely the people who set them up. Donations are tax free so foundations are a place to "park" big sums of money instead of declaring them as income on that fiscal year.

Of course, throughout the entire process, there are significant sums that end up helping people in need. However if you look at the net amounts, it's always lower than what would have been paid as tax. On a very simple level (and not accurate in percentages), imagine someone earning £100 where they would have to pay £50 in tax. Instead of that, they "donate" the £100 into their own foundation which means it's now no longer taxable. Once in the foundation, they spend £10 of that helping poor people with great fanfare and press releases. This is significantly less than the £50 tax that would have helped those in need anyway. So they have essentially deprived the state of £40 tax money but nobody knows or cares. This is exactly how foundations work, and every wealthy family has one to protect their own generational assets under the veneer of philanthropy.

Archewell made a loss because H&M earned less this year after the Spotify deal went bust and rumours of more contracts being terminated. So they had less money to park inside their foundation. They probably lost a few big ticket benefactors along the way as well. No private person is actually donating to Archewell the same way you might give £20 to the Red Cross.

I'm sorry, none of this seems based in fact. You've created a possible scenario but no evidence that is what is happening here. Archewell didn't 'make a loss' any more than the Royal Foundation did when it spent £5 million more than it brought in last year. Both have large reserve funds, so they can draw on them when they need to and large sums aren't sitting around when people and charities need help. No, no private person donates to them like they do for Red Cross or similar so I am curious why there so much scrutiny around their private wealth and what they choose to do with it, in this case give to charity.