Eighty-eight civil society organisations have already joined The Impulse Project and are working across 12 of Ukraine’s most vulnerable regions to support sustainable and inclusive community recovery and strengthen local resilience. In order to continue their projects and daily operations, some grantees are forced to constantly respond to growing security threats and stay ahead of emerging risks.
In October 2025, we wrote about the NGO “Intellect of Sumy Region,” whose office was destroyed by a Russian missile strike. In February this year, another attack damaged the organisation’s new premises as well.
Nine Impulse teams are currently working in Zaporizhzhia Oblast. Over the past year, security risks in the region have increased significantly — the frontline has moved closer to Zaporizhzhia, and the distance to it is now around 20 kilometres. The situation also remains difficult in Kharkiv, Sumy, Chernihiv, Kherson, and other frontline regions where project grantees continue to work.
We hope that Ukrainian civil society organisations will never again have to go through forced relocation because of Russia’s war against Ukraine. However, the security situation requires organisations to be prepared for different scenarios, even when they are difficult.
Within The Impulse Project, some organisations have already been forced to relocate from occupied or frontline cities. Some of them experienced relocation twice — after the war began in 2014 and again after the full-scale invasion in 2022.
We invited these organisations to share their experiences during a discussion organised within the project. Based on that conversation, we prepared a list of five steps and decisions that helped them preserve their teams and expertise, navigate relocation, and restore their work in new communities.
Lesson 1. Protect documents and resources
Relocated organisations emphasise that it is essential to think ahead about preserving documents, equipment, and financial resources. In moments of crisis, their availability often determines whether an organisation can continue operating.
Some organisations had already started regularly sending paper archives to safer regions before the full-scale invasion. Others admitted that after losing offices or having premises flooded, restoring documents became a long and difficult process. That is why digitisation has now become a mandatory practice for them. Grantees recommend regularly digitising statutory documents, financial reports, contracts, and payment records, and storing them in cloud services with protected access.
Participants also spoke separately about equipment and technical resources. Before deciding to relocate, some organisations had already distributed responsibilities internally: who would take the organisation’s seal, who would secure financial documents, and who would be responsible for equipment and access to data. Since 2021, some teams have introduced a rule requiring staff to take work laptops home every day. Others adopted internal orders postponing inventory procedures for the duration of martial law. This helped them successfully pass audits in situations where access to offices or part of the property was physically impossible.
Grantees also advise organisations to carefully assess risks related to banks and account access in advance:
- who has signing authority;
- how identification procedures work;
- whether backup options exist.
Experience shows that during evacuation or when an accountant is abroad, bank accounts may be temporarily blocked even when funds remain available. Organisations therefore recommend preparing alternative scenarios in advance — for example, granting signing authority to more than two people or working with several banks.
Lesson 2. Internal security protocols and a “Plan B”
Participants noted that successful relocation begins when a team openly discusses risks for the first time and prepares different scenarios for action. Several organisations stressed that internal policies and clearly written procedures were what helped them most. In critical moments, these procedures made it possible to act according to predefined algorithms: who is responsible for what, who makes decisions, and in what sequence actions should be taken.
The discussion also addressed security policies and protocols for losing communication. Some organisations prepared lists of team members’ contacts, information about relatives, and alternative communication methods in advance. They even discussed scenarios that had seemed unlikely at the time, such as a complete loss of mobile connection. One organisation had designated a specific day, time, and meeting point in advance, and during the occupation, the team actually relied on that arrangement.
Participants also stressed that alongside strategic planning, organisations should have scenario-based plans, including plans for sudden deterioration of the security situation. This requires answering difficult questions in advance:
- At what point do we decide to leave?
- What are the triggers for relocation?
- Is it still safe to gather people in the office?
- Is there access to a shelter?
- Who leaves first?
Some organisations also highlighted the need to include security or evacuation expenses in project budgets. Even if such costs are difficult to predict, potential financial risks still need to be identified.
It is equally important to prepare teams emotionally for the fact that decisions may be difficult. Grantees stressed that during wartime, there are no perfect decisions, only responsible ones. And while there is still time to choose, it is better to choose early.
Lesson 3. Relocating the team in stages
Several organisations noted that relocation cannot always happen all at once for every team member. Often it becomes a phased process, with people leaving gradually depending on the security situation, family circumstances, and personal возможности.
At the same time, this approach can also have advantages. Those who relocate first to new communities can find housing, establish initial contacts, and organise basic working conditions. This allows other team members to make decisions with a clearer understanding of where they are going and what to expect.
At the same time, grantees also honestly shared the opposite experience — situations in which teams became scattered across different cities or even countries, while some people remained under occupation or had to wait for an opportunity to leave. In such cases, restoring operations takes more time, and building a new team may take months.
Despite this, organisations stressed that it is important to eventually return to the question of preserving the team: maintaining communication, gradually rebuilding cooperation, and, if necessary, involving new people in the new location.
Lesson 4. Building partnerships in new communities
After relocation, organisations face another equally difficult stage — integrating into a new community. Here, grantees recommend acting proactively by independently reaching out to local authorities and civil society organisations.
One relocated organisation shared that they searched for official community websites, found mayors’ contact details, and sent short introductory letters explaining who they were, what experience they had, and how they could contribute. Over time, long-term cooperation developed with the communities that responded.
Alongside official outreach, grantees visited executive committees, employment centres, and other institutions, introduced themselves to local organisations, and spoke about their work. In some cases, volunteering became the first step that helped build trust and demonstrate willingness to work for the benefit of the community.
Cooperation with other civil society organisations also proved important. Grantees searched for local centres of civic activity, reached out through personal contacts and professional networks, and created partnerships or consortia. This approach helped them understand regional specifics more quickly and find their niche.
Participants also spoke about cultural and mental differences between regions. Integration takes time: organisations have to adapt to a new rhythm, new forms of interaction, and different community expectations. At the same time, many speakers stressed that the civic sector in most regions remains open to cooperation and interested in new initiatives.
Lesson 5. Adapting activities to new realities
Relocation often leads organisations to rethink their work, participants noted. Most organisations said that after moving they had to adapt their projects to new realities and community needs.
For some, this meant expanding areas of work. For others, it meant changing the focus of existing projects. Some teams shifted toward supporting internally displaced persons in host communities. Others began with volunteer work and only later launched their own initiatives.
Organisations noted that in new regions they had to take into account different administrative structures, the scale of communities, local characteristics, and the broader context. What worked in a large frontline city did not always suit smaller communities. As a result, organisations had to reassess needs, search for common ground, and rebuild strategies based on the realities of the new environment.
In some cases, changes in activities were also linked to changes within the team itself. After relocation, new people from local communities joined organisations, influencing their vision, priorities, and approaches to work. For many organisations, this became an impetus for growth and an opportunity to rethink values and strategic directions, as well as to take on long-term commitments — including joining the three-year Impulse Project and continuing to work on community recovery during wartime.
If you have ideas on how to support your community despite risks and uncertainty, join The Impulse Project through the Small Grants Competition.
The Impulse Project is implemented by the International Renaissance Foundation and East Europe Foundation with funding from Norway (Norad) and Sweden (Sida).
