by Hope Mohr
This was originally part of a talk series commissioned by the National Center for Choreography-Akron for the Creative Administration Research Summit Convening in June 2026.
Why.
Why are we reimagining the nonprofit?
Yes we need to be less dependent on philanthropy.
Yes we need defensive entity strategies in the face of federal threats.
But let's be strategic, not reactive. Strategy is turning what you have into what you need. So let us reimagine not from a place of lack, but grounded in what we have already have. Let's imagine not from a place of fear, but from a place of desire.
So what do we want?
We want to build artist power. Organizations should be contexts for building artist power, not ends unto themselves. Our reimagining should never be for organization's sake. We need to reimagine our organizations in order to transform conditions for artists. When we imagine economic power for artists, the first thing we think about is more funding. Yes, the field needs more money. But artist economic power is about more than paychecks and grants. It's about ownership and control. And not just for individual artists, but for the field. We need to approach our reimagining as a solidarity stance.
If we hold our collective economic power as the goal, as opposed to organizational preservation, how does that shift our reimaginings?
What.
What exactly are we reimagining? Another way of asking this is: What is an entity? An entity is both a structure and a culture. Reimagining is both structural and cultural work.
(1) What is organizational structure? Three things:
Entity selection on the state level (think of this like a cake),
Business Model, and
Policies (the ingredients in your cake). In other words: your bylaws, employee handbook, job titles, conflict resolution procedures, how you classify workers, how decisions are made, who makes the decisions and how.
(2) What is organizational culture? Your relationships. Are they built on trust? Is there accountability? What are your actual values? How does work actually get done? How does it feel to work in the organization?
Pulling on any of these levers can change your organization. But your policies and your culture do more to determine whether your organization supports artist power than your legal DNA–meaning whether you are a nonprofit or LLC or coop. You can be a hierarchical nonprofit or a horizontal one. You can be an extractive cooperative or an empowering one. The key is your policies and your culture, not your entity type.
That said, a lot of people look for alternatives to nonprofits through entity selection.
So let's look at four variations on the LLC and some lessons they hold.
Entity Alternatives: Lessons from the Land of LLC
LLC Variation #1: The low profit limited liability corporation (L3C). L3Cs were specifically designed to be eligible for "program-related investments,” or PRIs, which enable foundations to invest through equity, debt, or a mixture.
Lesson: We can reimagine the grantor-grantee relationship. PRIs transform foundations from grant-makers into investors, which is a profound shift..
Action Item: Develop relationships with foundations in their investment programs.
However, L3Cs have NOT been transformative because:
They are only recognized in about a dozen states.
They are not tax exempt forms.
And the IRS has never formally confirmed that L3C status automatically qualifies for PRIs. Each investment still requires individual IRS review. Relatedly, there has been a lack of precedent from major foundations to fund L3Cs.
Lesson: Our reimagining must be field-wide. It must include funders and legislation and tax regulation. These are co-dependent systems. Innovation on the entity level alone has limited impact.
With that in mind, let's look at A-Corps.
LLC Variation #2: The Artist Corporation is a new entity type coming online in Colorado that is a readymade cake mix version of an artist-friendly LLC. Some A-Corp lessons:
You can achieve everything the A-corp offers through a normal LLC Operating Agreement.
These are not tax exempt forms. The initial goal was to make A-Corps eligible for philanthropic funding, but doing that requires a federal tax law change that won't be up for debate for many years. So for now, A-Corps will need to keep using a fiscal sponsor sidecar.
A Corps are less about mission and more about correcting power asymmetry between artists and capital. Action item: Let’s bring this logic into nonprofits.
LLC Variation #3: The LLC Coop. You can have an LLC that functions like a coop, with profit distribution either based on shares or patronage. Lesson (again): despite the legal DNA of an organization, you can implement democracy and economic justice through your policies–in this case, your Operating Agreement. Another lesson: Access to capital continues to vex artist coops. Funders must support our reimaginings by giving to entities that are not c3s.
LLC Variation #4: The Model L Fiscal Sponsorship
Here the sponsor acts as the sole member of a LLC. This shares many features with a “Model A” fiscal sponsor arrangement. I mention this entity form because it is a relatively new form of fiscal sponsorship and an interesting example of entity hybridity.
Hybridity is an essential strategy for our reimagining.
What does hybridity look like within a nonprofit?
First, it looks like changing our mindset. We are not charity cases. We are hybrid entrepreneurs. Self-determination, not learned helplessness.
Nonprofit does not mean no profits. You can bring in earned revenue. There are rules around that (ask me about them).
What if we adopt a differentiated funding strategy that accesses profit-seeking investors for commercial activity and philanthropy for mission-driven activity?
What if we build a bridge between the impact investment sector and the arts?
Let’s talk about hybrid ventures between nonprofits.
We are seeing multi-entity forms emerge for the purposes of revenue diversification and entity defense–for example a nonprofit owning equity in a for-profit or a nonprofit with a relationship with another entity incorporated in another state or in Canada.
But I am more interested in hybrid ventures that are designed to build collective artist power.
Power is not a thing we have in isolation. Power is something we build in relationship.
So let's imagine nonprofits as coalitions that harness the strengths of differently positioned organizations:
Let's look at Voices for a Creative New York, co-led by five different nonprofits.
Let's look at the Artist Legal Cafe, a cross-sector collaboration among a private law firm, an arts advocacy nonprofit, and a legal services nonprofit.
What if organizational affiliations are less important than our collective power? If building artist power is a movement, what if what is best for the movement is to let go of our organizational affiliations?
These questions demand that we also reimagine dissolution as a movement strategy.
What if winding down a nonprofit happened proactively and in partnership with other orgs?
What if nonprofits repurposed their assets so the field consolidated into fewer, but healthier orgs? For example, the merger of Pittsburgh Civic Light Opera and Pittsburgh Public Theater, which dissolved to form a third, new entity. By pooling resources, the work continues.
I think about Grief + Hope, the mutual aid effort in response to the fires in LA. This was not an organization, just volunteers.
The lesson here is that the work can happen without an "organization." But the work requires organizing.
When we think like organizers, instead of arts administrators, our priorities change.
How we relate to each other changes.
We move differently.
////
I am an artist and an attorney for artists.
If you are an artist who needs legal support or an arts organization looking for help with strategy, reach out to me at movementlaw.net.