This is a pretty gross distortion of how private foundations work in the US.

A private foundation is a type of charity that primarily exists to give money to other charities instead of performing charitable activities themselves. 100% of any money held in a private foundation has to be spent on charitable activities over time.

However, they only have to spend at least 5% per year. They usually invest the other 95% so they can continue to grow the assets, so that they can continue paying out to other charities in perpetuity, theoretically.

So if a foundation had a million dollars, then they’d have to give out $50,000 over the course of the year. If, over the next year, they had 10% growth in their investment returns on their remaining $950,000, they’d have a new total of $1,045,000 in the second year, and they’d had to pay out $52,250 (5% of the new total) in charitable grants.

This is not a case of people putting money in a charity and just hoarding for their personal gain. It’s supposed to encourage sustainability of charitable programs, so that there will always be ways for charities to seek large grants from major funders.

I haven’t researched the Archewell Foundation at all, but don’t let people convince you that private foundations are some kind of secret cash cow for the ultra-rich. Occasionally there are foundations who do shady things with the money, but most of them are doing really important charitable work.