Skip to content
Archewell Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Archewell Foundation

The ARCHEWELL FOUNDATION is a non-profit organization created by prince harry and meghan, the duke and duchess of sussex.

$1.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
22
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Education$1.1MCivil Rights$755kInternational$650kPublic Safety & Disaster$550kArts & Culture$513kHuman Services$482kPhilanthropy$400kHealth$364kOther$0
02FY2024 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 22 grants below total $910,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,256,565 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $346,565 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k17 grants · $435k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $475k
$27,500
Median grant
12
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SCREEN SANITY$150,000
NAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC$125,000
HOPELAB FOUNDATION INC$100,000
THE GEANCO FOUNDATION$50,000
#HALFTHESTORY$50,000
MOZAIC$27,500
REFUGEE WOMEN'S NETWORK$27,500
NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR$27,500
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENT ENTREPRENEURS (FISCAL SPONSOR FOR MIRY'S LIST)$27,500
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENT ENTREPRENEURS (FISCAL SPONSOR FOR SOFT LANDING MISSO$27,500
NEW AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF MASSACHUSETTS$27,500
WOMEN FOR AFGHAN WOMEN$27,500
MILWAUKEE MUSLIM WOMEN'S COALITION$27,500
CULTURINGUA$27,500
ALIGHT$27,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–24, $760k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 60% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HARVEST HOME INC: $10k → 14%GIRLS WHO CODE (MARSHALL PLANS FOR MOMS): $65k → 17%REFUGEE WOMEN'S NETWORK INC: $28k → 14%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $28k → 13%MOZAIC: $28k → 4%THE DINNER PARTY LABS: $21k → 10%WOMENS WELLNESS SPACE: $250k → 10%MILWAUKEE MUSLIM WOMEN'S COALITION: $28k → 17%REFUGEE WOMEN'S NETWORK: $28k → 14%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $28k → 13%MOZAIC: $28k → 4%PARENTSTOGETHER FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%GIRLS WHO CODE: $50k → 17%US VETS: $6k → 14%EQUIMUNDO: $65k → 14%EQUIMUNDO: $25k → 14%PARENTS TOGETHER FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MN
WI
NY
MA
IN
PA
CT
CA
VA
MD
KS
TN
DC
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $277k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$189k · 68% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: TO FIGHT FOR SYSTEMIC CHANGE THAT ENSURES THE DIGITAL WORLD CATERS FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE BY DESIGN AND DEFAULT. · TO CREATE A LANDING PAGE WITH INFORMATION ON ONLINE SAFETY ADVICE FOR PARENTS AND YOUNG PEOPLE. · TO SUPPORT AND INCREASE AWARENESS OF THE YOUNG CHAMPIONS PROGRAMME

North America (Canada and Mexico)$78k · 28% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO BUILD AND REFURBISH BASKETBALL COURTS IN ABUJA, NIGERIA. · TO BUILD COMMUNITY FOR REFUGEES IN THE WELCOME PROJECT

Sub-Saharan Africa$10k · 4% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO EDUCATE, TRAIN, AND ADVOCATE FOR YOUTH AND VULNERABLE GROUPS IN SOUTH AFRICA.

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of Archewell Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 21% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 16%.

Archewell Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 18% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 16 repeat orgs$2.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +8% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
34

Total granted

$1.9M
$2.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
0%

Still filing today

94%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $310k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesInternationalArts & CultureEducationHealthCivil RightsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2021–2022 · $225k · revenue +34%
  • Hopelab Foundation Inc
    2× · 2022–2024 · $200k · revenue +134%
  • GIRLS WHO CODE INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $115k · revenue +5%

Funded once

  • WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $300k · revenue +167%
  • TR
    TEAM RUBICON INC
    one grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue +18%
  • WW
    WOMEN'S WELLNESS SPA
    one grant, 2023 · $250k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
The Conversationalist
—
2
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
3
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
4
Women Donors Network

Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.

Philanthropy
5
Open Transformation Lab Inc

The missions is to provide information and resources to counter disinformation, propaganda, and offer a window to trusted content about the events that are going on in the Middle East.

Science & Tech
6
Women Deliver Inc

Women deliver is a global feminist advocacy organization with a clear mission: to ensure that every self-identifying girl and woman has control over her body and life. see organization's full mission statement in schedule o.

Education
7
Global Entrepreneurship Network

The global entrepreneurship network operates programs in 180 countries aimed at making it easier for anyone, anywhere to start and scale a business. by fostering deeper cross-border collaboration between entrepreneurs, researchers,…

Education
8
Womens Funding Network

Our mission as a global alliance is to provide strategies, research, and resources that support the critical agency and influence of women's foundations and gender justice funders in the movement for equality, justice, and power for all.

Education
9
Fuller Project for International Reporting Inc

The fuller project is the global newsroom dedicated to groundbreaking reporting that catalyzes positive change for women.

International
10
Global Impact Investing Network Inc

The global impact investing network, inc. is dedicated to increasing the scale and effectiveness of impact investing to solve systemic problems facing people and the planet. impact investments are investments made into companies,…

Philanthropy
11
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
12
Partnersglobal

Partnersglobal (partners) works through a global network to support local leaders and create partnerships that transform conflict, strengthen democratic institutions, and achieve sustainable development.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Who Code Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hopelab Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

63 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 63 of the 65 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
60/63
Grantees still filing
36/63
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UCLA FOUNDATION: $250,000 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATIONPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $250,000 · EducationPresident and Fell…GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $225,000 · EducationGEORGETOWN UNIVERS…SCREEN SANITY INC: $150,000 · EducationSCREEN SANITY INCPURPOSE FOUNDATION: $44,000 · Education+3 more: $70,000 · Education+3 moreWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $300,000 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL K…HUMAN FIRST COALITION: $150,000 · InternationalHUMAN FIRST COA…THE HALO TRUST (USA) INC: $100,000 · InternationalTHE HALO TRUST …Women for Afghan Women Inc: $77,500 · InternationalWomen for Afgha…THE GEANCO FOUNDATION INC: $70,000 · InternationalTHE GEANCO FOUN…HIAS INC: $50,000 · InternationalHIAS INCALIGHT: $27,500 · International+3 more: $45,000 · International+3 moreURL Media Holdings Inc: $200,000 · OtherURL Media Holdings IncNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $200,000 · OtherNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTERCOLOROFCHANGEORG: $125,000 · OtherCOLOROFCHANGEORGSHELTER MINISTRIES OF DALLAS FOUNDATION: $90,000 · OtherHopelab Foundation Inc: $200,000 · OtherHopelab Foundation IncTEAM RUBICON INC: $250,000 · OtherTEAM RUBICON INCKABOOM INC: $165,000 · OtherKABOOM INCCORTICO CORPORATION: $100,000 · OtherCORTICO CORPORATIONSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $84,510 · Other+12 more: $435,562 · Other+12 moreWOMEN'S WELLNESS SPA(CE): $250,000 · Human ServicesWOMEN'S WELLNE…GIRLS WHO CODE INC: $115,000 · Human ServicesGIRLS WHO CODE…EQUIMUNDO CENTER FOR MASCULINITIES AND SOCIAL JUS: $90,000 · Human ServicesEQUIMUNDO CENT…ParentsTogether Foundation: $75,000 · Human ServicesParentsTogethe…MOZAIC: $55,640 · Human ServicesMOZAICREFUGEE WOMENS NETWORK INC: $55,000 · Human ServicesREFUGEE WOMENS…NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $55,000 · Human ServicesNEIGHBOR TO NE…THE MILWAUKEE WOMEN'S CENTER INC: $27,500 · Human Services+3 more: $36,500 · Human ServicesOMPRAKASH INC: $280,000 · PhilanthropyOMPRAKASH INCROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $250,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER P…HOPEWELL FUND: $100,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUNDCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $64,216 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES AID…NAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC: $500,000 · Civil RightsNAACP EMPOW…Minas List Inc: $55,000 · Civil RightsMinas List …THE LOVELAND FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 · Civil RightsTHE LOVELAN…The Markup News Inc: $90,000 · Arts & CultureARTogether: $55,000 · Arts & CultureTHE 19TH NEWS: $50,000 · Arts & CultureTEAM UNITY INCORPORATED: $25,000 · Arts & CultureFREE PRESS: $25,000 · Arts & CultureTHE BERNARD AND SHIRLEY KINSEY FOUNDATION FOR ARTS AND EDUCATION: $25,000 · Arts & CulturePROJECT HEALTHY MINDS: $25,000 · Arts & CultureSustainable Media Center: $15,000 · Arts & Culture
Education$989,000International$820,000Other$1,850,072Human Services$759,640Philanthropy$694,216Civil Rights$605,000Arts & Culture$310,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC: $500,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $300,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOMPRAKASH INC: $280,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEAM RUBICON INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $225,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $200,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHopelab Foundation Inc: $200,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetKABOOM INC: $165,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetHUMAN FIRST COALITION: $150,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetSCREEN SANITY INC: $150,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetCOLOROFCHANGEORG: $125,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGIRLS WHO CODE INC: $115,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE HALO TRUST (USA) INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCORTICO CORPORATION: $100,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetEQUIMUNDO CENTER FOR MASCULINITIES AND SOCIAL JUS: $90,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetThe Markup News Inc: $90,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $84,510 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWomen for Afghan Women Inc: $77,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetParentsTogether Foundation: $75,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetTHE GEANCO FOUNDATION INC: $70,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $64,216 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEW AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF MASSACHUSETTS INC: $55,800 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMOZAIC: $55,640 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetARTogether: $55,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetCULTURINGUA: $55,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetMinas List Inc: $55,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetREFUGEE WOMENS NETWORK INC: $55,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $55,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetPLUS Fund Paid Leave for the United States: $50,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetTHE 19TH NEWS: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE LOVELAND FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetHIAS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGIRLS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHALFTHESTORY: $50,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetWellBeing International Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetPURPOSE FOUNDATION: $44,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR SOCIAL CONNECTION: $39,302 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetMUSLIM WOMEN'S COALITION INC: $27,960 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetTHE MILWAUKEE WOMEN'S CENTER INC: $27,500 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetALIGHT: $27,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGlobal Impact: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMARCY LAB INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTEAM UNITY INCORPORATED: $25,000 over 1y, 53% of budgetFREE PRESS: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

GofundmeorgThe William & Flora H…John D and Catherine …Foundation to Promote…Globalgiving Foundati…Tides FoundationSocial Impact FundNew Venture FundImpactassetsincRockefeller Philanthr…The Ford FoundationJewish Communal Fund
GofundmeorgCA17.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gofundmeorg · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Globalgiving Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Social Impact Fund · New Venture Fund · Impactassetsinc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Ford Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Archewell Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Archewell Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Hias Inc: 88% of income from government
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
  • New American Association of Massachusetts Inc: 12% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Cortico Corporation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Archewell Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Archewell Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 65 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Archewell’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home