Harry Faces Criticism Amid Charity Dispute

Prince Harry’s Charity, Sentebale, Faces Governance Criticism – fallout Continues

LONDON – Prince Harry’s charity, Sentebale, which supports young people affected by HIV/AIDS in Lesotho and Botswana, is embroiled in a governance dispute that led to the Prince stepping down as patron earlier this year. A recent report from the Charity Commission for England and Wales has highlighted significant failings in the organization’s leadership and internal processes.

The Commission’s examination, triggered by reports in February 2025, revealed disagreements stemming from a proposed new fundraising strategy for the United States in 2023. These disagreements escalated into a public rift,culminating in Harry’s March declaration that he would relinquish his patron role to support resigning trustees.

“Sentebale’s problems played out in the public eye, enabling a damaging dispute to harm the charity’s reputation, risk overshadowing its many achievements, and jeopardizing the charity’s ability to deliver for the very beneficiaries it was created to serve,” stated David Holdsworth, CEO of the Charity Commission.

The report specifically points to a lack of effective oversight and a failure to manage conflicts of interest, contributing to the damaging public fallout. Sophie Chandauka, the current chair of the board, welcomed the report, stating it validated concerns she had previously raised regarding governance issues and “unacceptable behaviors” displayed within the organization.She criticized a “damaging media campaign” launched by those who resigned in March.

However, a spokesperson for Prince Harry sharply criticized the Commission’s findings, arguing the report inadequately addresses the consequences of the current chair’s actions, which they beleive will ultimately harm the children Sentebale serves. The Prince is now exploring option avenues to support young people in Botswana and Lesotho.

A Legacy Under Strain: Understanding the Importance of Charity Governance

Sentebale, founded in 2006 by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho, was established as a memorial to their late mothers, Princess Diana and Queen Mamohato of Lesotho.The charity has provided vital support to vulnerable children and adolescents, offering healthcare, education, and psychosocial support.

This situation underscores the critical importance of robust governance structures within charitable organizations. Effective oversight, clear conflict-of-interest policies, and transparent decision-making processes are essential not only for maintaining public trust but, more importantly, for ensuring that charitable resources are directed effectively towards their intended beneficiaries.

The fallout at Sentebale serves as a cautionary tale for the non-profit sector. Disputes,even when rooted in a desire to improve fundraising or operational efficiency,can quickly escalate and inflict lasting damage on an organization’s reputation and its ability to fulfill its mission.

Looking Ahead:

The Charity commission’s report is expected to prompt a review of Sentebale’s governance practices and potentially lead to further scrutiny of similar organizations. The long-term impact on the charity’s fundraising efforts and its ability to deliver vital services remains to be seen. The situation highlights the delicate balance between passionate advocacy and responsible stewardship within the charitable landscape.

What potential intermediate sanctions could be applied to individuals involved with Archewell, based on the reported executive compensation?

The Allegations: A Breakdown of the Controversy

Prince harry, Duke of Sussex, is currently facing mounting public adn media scrutiny following allegations of financial mismanagement and openness concerns surrounding his Archewell Foundation. The core of the dispute centers around the foundation’s reporting of its finances to the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and questions regarding the allocation of charitable funds. Several news outlets have highlighted discrepancies between Archewell’s stated mission – supporting mental health initiatives, online safety, and racial justice – and its actual spending.

Key criticisms include:

Executive Compensation: Reports indicate significant spending on executive salaries and benefits, raising questions about whether a disproportionate amount of donations is being used for administrative costs rather than direct charitable impact.

Programme Expenses: Critics point to a relatively low percentage of funds directly allocated to program expenses compared to fundraising and administrative costs. This has fueled accusations of the foundation operating more as a vehicle for personal branding than a genuine philanthropic association.

Transparency Issues: Concerns have been raised about the lack of detailed information provided in Archewell’s publicly available financial reports, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness of its programs and the impact of its spending.

Transfer of Funds: Scrutiny has focused on a $13.9 million transfer from Archewell to a related entity, Archewell Impact, in 2022, with questions surrounding the purpose and justification for this transaction.

Examining Archewell’s Financial Reporting

archewell Foundation’s Form 990 filings with the IRS, publicly available through ProPublica’s Nonprofit explorer, are at the heart of the controversy. These filings reveal:

1. 2020: Archewell reported revenue of $9.4 million and expenses of $8.8 million.
2. 2021: Revenue increased to $13.2 million, with expenses reaching $11.4 million.
3. 2022: Revenue surged to $26.6 million, but expenses also rose substantially to $24.4 million, including the aforementioned $13.9 million transfer to Archewell Impact.

These figures have prompted analysis from charity watchdogs, who typically assess organizations based on metrics like program expense ratio (percentage of funds spent directly on charitable programs) and administrative expense ratio. Archewell’s ratios have been flagged as possibly concerning by some observers.

The Role of Archewell Impact

Archewell Impact,a for-profit entity,plays a crucial role in the foundation’s operations. It’s described as a commercial arm designed to generate revenue to support Archewell’s charitable work. Though, the relationship between the two entities and the financial transactions between them have become a focal point of criticism.

Critics argue that the structure raises potential conflicts of interest and blurs the lines between charitable and commercial activities. The $13.9 million transfer to Archewell Impact is notably contentious, with demands for greater clarity on how those funds were utilized. Archewell maintains that the transfer was a legitimate business expense related to the development of its commercial ventures, which are intended to fund its charitable programs in the long term.

Public Reaction and Media Coverage

The controversy has sparked a significant backlash on social media,with many users expressing disappointment and questioning Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s commitment to charitable work. The story has been widely covered by major news outlets, including The New York Post, The Daily Mail, and fox News, often framing the narrative as a scandal involving financial mismanagement.

The negative publicity comes at a sensitive time for the couple, who have been actively promoting their philanthropic endeavors and seeking to establish themselves as influential voices on social issues. The situation has also drawn criticism from conservative commentators, who have long been skeptical of the couple’s motives and actions.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

Charity law experts emphasize the importance of transparency and accountability in nonprofit organizations. While Archewell’s financial practices are not necessarily illegal, they may raise ethical concerns.

key legal considerations include:

Intermediate Sanctions: The IRS has the authority to impose penalties on individuals who engage in excessive benefit transactions with nonprofit organizations, such as receiving unreasonably high compensation.

Private Benefit: Nonprofit organizations are prohibited from operating for the private benefit of individuals or entities.

Conflict of interest: Board members and executives have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the organization and avoid conflicts of interest.

Impact on Archewell’s Future

The ongoing scrutiny poses a significant challenge to Archewell’s future. The foundation may need to take steps to address the concerns raised by critics and restore public trust. potential actions include:

Increased Transparency: Publishing more detailed financial reports and providing greater clarity on its spending practices.

* Autonomous Audit: Commissioning an independent audit of its finances to verify its accuracy