The source of funding for a lot of these events in the US is somewhat insidious though. Case in point is Museums On Us is sponsored by Bank of America. Museums oftentimes barely charge anything for admission partly because a lot of their cost expenditures are highly restricted by the grants and agreements of donors they've signed. Museums are visited more than sports stadiums in the US but museum professionals are hardly paid pro athlete salaries. Good example of how museums in general are struggling and desperate is that Fisk Art Museum was motioning to sell off the most prized parts of its collection to private buyers including Georgia O'Keefe works explicitly donated by her to keep there so that art is accessible to everyone - at a historically black college at that. The grant structured nature of musums has really made it hard for them to operate with modern operating costs, and given universities' shift toward pro sports for revenue we can't sustain most museums. Many are literally one person with 20+ volunteer staff, some of whom were ex-employees that were laid off but just love the collection that much. Other museums are run by descendants of tycoons and will exist basically forever.
So do be aware of how you support your local museum. In some cases, I might argue they're total losses and we'd do everyone involved a favor by letting it dissolve. Many museums are glorified corporate or robber baron legacy temples. Museums aren't necessarily money-driven either and each one is highly reflective of whom the board has appointed to lead it.
I'm not being anti-corporate, just making it clear that museums can be corporate-run and are highly variable in operations.
Disclosure: my wife is a museum collections curation professional