Meghan and Harry ‘make no effort’ with Archewell charity work
Royal commentator Kinsey Schofield has criticized Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for their lack of effort in running their signature charity, Archewell. Schofield’s comments come after tax filings raised questions about the viability of the non-profit organization. In an interview with GB News, Schofield accused Archewell of relying on established charities to cover up their lack of meaningful impact. She referred to the couple as Spotify grifters, suggesting that they simply insert themselves into existing charitable initiatives without putting in the necessary effort.
Schofield specifically criticized Archewell’s annual impact report, stating that the organization takes credit for initiatives that were primarily driven by other charities. She cited their involvement in vaccine programs and supporting displaced Afghan women as examples of Archewell piggybacking on the efforts of others. According to Schofield, Archewell merely adds their name to existing projects rather than taking the lead in creating meaningful change.
While Schofield had strong criticisms for Archewell, she did acknowledge Prince Harry’s efforts with the Invictus Games initiative. However, she emphasized that the Invictus Games was not solely a Harry initiative but a collaborative effort involving the Royal Family and the Palace. In contrast, Archewell’s approach seemed to be attaching themselves to existing successful charities rather than initiating their own impactful projects.
The recent tax filings for Archewell revealed that the organization had only two donors last year, who contributed a fraction of the previous year’s donations. As a result, the charity recorded a significant loss and had a substantial shortfall in donations. Furthermore, it was revealed that the Sussexes spent only one hour per week on their charity work, despite raising millions of pounds.
In summary, Kinsey Schofield’s criticism of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s efforts with their Archewell charity raises questions about the couple’s commitment and impact. With the organization relying on established charities and recording a financial loss, the scrutiny surrounding their charitable endeavors continues.
