The following recommendations are designed to reflect the needs identified above and are aimed at all stakeholders in creating a framework for a comprehensive, human-centric recovery.
For the Ukrainian government:
- Develop more effective communication that reaches the local level, to support local CSOs’ knowledge of the current reform agenda and provide practical guidance on how they can take part in the delivery and/or monitoring of local government to ensure effective implementation. Expand existing forums for civil society engagement in the Ukraine Donors Platform (UDP) and engage with local associations and networks of local self-government (such as the Association of Ukrainian Cities and the Association of Territorial Communities of Ukraine) on common thematic issues such as IDP or veteran reintegration.
- Improve in-country coordination and collaboration at all stages of the recovery process, from strategy to implementation and monitoring. Establish a cross-sectoral recovery coordination and facilitation unit to bring together key stakeholders (national government, Western donors, private sector actors and CSOs) to share knowledge and data, and better coordinate on communication and capacity-building needs.
This effort could be facilitated as part of the human recovery sectoral groups at the UDP. By extending participation in these groups to representatives of civil society, private companies and philanthropy, space would be created for the generation of ideas, coordination and feedback. A pilot case could focus on housing policy, veteran reintegration or diaspora engagement in recovery.
A coordination and facilitation unit such as this could help increase the spread of information across Ukraine and broaden the uptake of various state-funded programmes among target groups, especially those in small communities. The unit could map key activities related to social recovery using the DREAM system. It could also collate information about various local recovery hubs – including state resilience centres, veterans’ spaces, community clubs and centres – and regional agencies for recovery, among other relevant contacts. The unit could connect and pool global expertise for the benefit of Ukraine. The lessons learned may then yield innovative and effective solutions that can be replicated in other countries.
- Provide clear guidelines on best practice for stakeholder and community engagement in the public investment process. Invest in joint training for government, private sector actors and CSOs on the European Code of Conduct on Partnerships, the upcoming new civic engagement modules on DREAM and other tools for civic monitoring. The design of these investments, particularly in social recovery, should be based on the needs of target groups and focus on the improvement of their well-being.
- Embed the use of the European Code of Conduct on Partnership within the newly established Public Investment Management (PIM) framework at the local level. This practice will build the institutional strength required for regional and local CSOs to access and manage EU cohesion funds, which Ukraine will unlock once it achieves EU accession. Update the PIM guidelines to mandate that municipal projects must go through a formalized consultation process with local representatives of civil society, academia and business before being included in the DREAM system.
- Improve the visibility of financial data in the DREAM ecosystem by implementing standardized tracking tools. Provide a breakdown of the whole financial pipeline, including allocated funds, tranches released, actual expenditures and contractor disbursements. Implement regional and local filters with intuitive visual aids (such as bar charts indicating real-time progress towards targets).
- Develop and promote a public consultation module via DREAM that engages interested stakeholders already at the level of developing strategy and further down the line when large projects (meaning those of 500 million UAH and above) are approved for funding. Create a secure communication channel in the DREAM interface, through which verified local CSOs can flag discrepancies between reported financial spending and physical project completion. This instrument should also feature a clear model for the DREAM platform to respond to this feedback. This facility will be important to reduce the risk of corruption.
- Expand the social services marketplace to increase the number of suitable service providers and improve the quality of services. The Ministry of Social Policy and Ministry of Veteran Affairs should evaluate various pilot schemes (such as resilience and veteran hubs, or grants for veteran-owned businesses) to improve their understanding of models that could be scaled. Data-collection and -monitoring are essential for identifying gaps in services and resources, either between various vulnerable groups or regions. CSOs – especially large network coalitions – can also be an effective partner in providing such data.
- Improve knowledge-sharing on recovery data, either by developing UDP resources or by expanding DREAM’s functionality. Integration of data will eliminate duplicate entries, align strategic donor priorities with local municipal workflows and act as an institutional repository for lessons learnt. International donors will be better able to track how their macro-level commitments are being converted into individual community projects. Meanwhile, allowing hromadas to upload technical blueprints, procurement templates or post-project evaluations will help prevent costly mistakes, encouraging mutual learning.
- Accelerate the legislative finalization and technical implementation of a ‘percentage philanthropy’ mechanism within the Tax Code of Ukraine. This mechanism will enable citizens to direct a fixed percentage of their personal income tax to selected CSOs. The draft bill was registered in mid-2022. Given the current fiscal squeeze, allowing such allocations to vetted non-profits would help bolster organizations that are already supporting veterans and their families. Over the longer term, the mechanism will help develop a culture of giving and ensure domestic financial sustainability for the recovery process, while aligning social service provision with local needs.
For Ukrainian CSOs:
- Form more thematic, regional and local clusters to share resources and advocate for policy changes with one voice. Instead of competing for the same small grants, local CSOs would be able to aggregate data, share operational costs and wield enough collective bargaining power to influence regional and national recovery priorities.
- Work on costing and improving standards of service provision. For a social services market to be effective, CSOs must prove their value and competitive advantage, as compared to private or community-owned service organizations. CSOs involved in service provision (and those hoping to become involved) need to document and demonstrate impact. Include representatives of key groups that benefit from these services on governance boards to grow and develop services in line with clients’ needs and expectations.
- Improve perceptions of the sector’s integrity. Given the sector’s internal fragilities, and to mitigate the risks of co-optation and corruption in the sector identified by our survey participants, self-regulation, the quality of non-profit governance, and the accountability of organizations to members and key constituencies should all be strengthened. Civil society must be proactive in inviting representatives of the Ukrainian government and Western donors to discuss these risks and propose solutions. Together, they should determine if a new regulatory body (akin to the Charity Commission in the UK) could appropriately be established, or whether this function could instead be performed by Ukraine’s Ministry of Justice. These discussions should also cover how best to institute a vetting process for CSOs involved in bidding for recovery funding – possibly along similar lines to the State Register of Social Services Providers. Set a clear delineation between groups responsible for monitoring public spending and those to which recovery work is subcontracted.
- Conduct reference studies and surveys to ensure that strategic policies are evidence-based and relate to the lived experiences of affected populations. Projects like this will also allow CSOs to communicate these needs to local authorities and modify social protection when necessary. It will allow presenting a stronger case for grant applications to international donors, informing them directly on the specific, on-the-ground needs of Ukrainian communities.
For international donors:
- Strengthen civil society representation in the UDP by establishing a Civil Society Council, similar to the existing Business Council. The two secretariats in Kyiv and Brussels should seek to engage both Ukraine-based and diaspora organizations from countries with large Ukrainian communities in the recovery process. Members of the new council should be selected by nominations to the secretariat from networks, associations and platforms that represent key stakeholders for the recovery (such as educators, environmental groups, IDPs, people with disabilities, veterans and young people).
- Prioritize ‘direct localization’. Ensure that local Ukrainian CSOs are not just implementers for international NGOs and enable them to lead the humanitarian and recovery response. Because local CSOs possess local knowledge and remain embedded in their communities, this approach can create a more sustainable process in the long-term. By enhancing localization, international donors can bypass the heavy cost overheads often associated with large international intermediaries and benefit from a more efficient distribution of resources tailored to specific community needs.
- Provide flexible, multi-year funding – particularly in front-line regions. Social recovery includes complex matters like helping people to overcome psychological trauma or integrating IDPs into changed and traumatized communities). It can often take years to achieve. To enable NGOs to provide these services effectively, abandon six-month project cycles and instead provide ‘core funding’ that allows local partners to plan long-term. Consider introducing consortium- or network-based grants that require co-application from groups of 3–5 local CSOs representing different municipalities or specialized skills on a single recovery theme (e.g. environmental protection, anti-corruption monitoring or psycho-social support for veterans). This type of grant will allow CSOs to pool their resources and enhance their influence with local authorities.
- Harmonize reporting standards. Donors must lower the bureaucratic barriers for smaller, local CSOs to encourage their participation in recovery. Coordinate with other donors to create a single, unified reporting template for Ukrainian partners. Local CSOs invest many hours filling out different forms for different international donors. Lifting this bureaucratic burden could incentivize smaller CSOs with limited capacity to participate.
- Invest in capacity-building and mentorship, especially for those CSOs working with vulnerable groups in front-line regions. Provide workshops to help smaller CSOs build the institutional strength needed to manage large projects. Assist CSOs willing to provide social services in developing clear standards, costing, monitoring and marketing.
- Emphasize the human dimension of the Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC) and engage with a wider range of veteran-led CSOs. Ensure that major URC panels on defence industry growth and regional development include speakers from the Ukrainian veteran community. Veterans have first-hand experience with logistics, demining and social realities in the front-line regions, making their input invaluable. Mirror the URC’s business-to-business fair with dedicated spaces focused on human capital to facilitate direct connections with Ukrainian CSOs specializing in needs such as wartime-trauma therapy, prosthetic innovation, vocational retraining and accessible urban design.
