Uncertainty, threats, and turbulence – these three words define the modern world. Ukraine has found itself at its forefront: simultaneously waging a war for its survival, implementing reforms, and shaping a new model of resilience upon which the future of Europe itself depends. This experience is valuable for countries around the world.

Ukraine demonstrates a unique model in which the state and civil society act in partnership, becoming a source of solutions and trust, grounded in a human-centered approach – the agency and engagement of every individual in the processes of recovery.
Civil society organizations (CSOs perform two key functions: as co-creators, they initiate bottom-up solutions and connect the state with citizens; as independent monitors, they oversee the quality, transparency, and compliance of state decisions. The ability to combine both roles forms an infrastructure of trust.

The Catalog of Solutions is a set of systemic proposals developed by civil society experts, in which CSOs act not as authors of demands directed at the state, but as co-owners of change that requires the joint efforts of government, international partners, business, and civil society.
The Catalog is addressed to international donors, EU governments, and partners involved in decision-making regarding support for Ukraine.

Principles of the Catalog

Human-centricity – the individual, their dignity, and well-being are the starting point of every solution.

Human rights and inclusivity – solutions are grounded in respect for human rights and freedoms, non-discrimination, and equal access to opportunities and services for all population groups, taking into account their specific needs.

Cross-sectoral cooperation – effective recovery is only possible through collaboration between the state, civil society, business, and international partners.

Democracy and good governance – every solution involves participation and inclusion, dialogue, and accountability.

Before moving to sector-specific solutions, we identify two overarching framework solutions that permeate the entire architecture of Ukraine’s resilience. Their value lies in their systemic integration: each simultaneously transforms security, governance, education, social policy, and the economy. Without them, individual sectoral solutions remain fragmented, and the sustainability of reforms remains fragile.

Framework Solutions

1. Implementation of a Total Defence Model

Expected impact. Transforming defence from a state-centered institutional function into a shared responsibility of society as a whole. Strengthening the country’s resilience to hybrid and military threats through the simultaneous reinforcement of security, educational, mobilization, and social cohesion components. Reducing civilian casualties, enabling faster and more effective community responses to crises, and strengthening trust between the state and society.

Context and challenges. The experience of war has demonstrated that the line between the front line and the rear is blurred: drone and missile attacks reach communities far from combat zones, while volunteer initiatives and civil society increasingly assume humanitarian and defence-related functions. At the same time, Ukraine’s defence model remains largely centralized, the educational component of security is outdated, and social cohesion, despite its significant potential, is not yet viewed as a component of defence capacity.

Essence of the solution. Systematic implementation of a total defence model.

Key components:

• Social cohesion as a component of defence – support for community initiatives, memorialization, and the integration of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and national minorities into local defence and security processes.
• Regulatory framework – development of a regulatory framework for total defence across the fields of security, education, social policy, youth policy, and cultural policy.
• Integration of communities into the defence system – community security plans; expanded authority regarding Volunteer Formations of Territorial Communities (VFTCs) and air defence (AD) for critical infrastructure facilities; establishment of mobile air defence units; financing of community security spaces.
• Reform of the educational component – civic education, security literacy, and media literacy integrated from school to university and adult education programmes.
• Transparent mobilization and human resource management mechanisms for the security sector, aligned with labour market needs and a cyclical model of military service.

2. Continuous Organizational Capacity Development of State Institutions, Local Self-Government Bodies, and Civil Society

Expected impact. Transitioning from isolated trainings and short-term projects to a permanent infrastructure for developing the capacity of Ukrainian institutions. Strengthening the ability of the state, local communities, and civil society to implement reforms, fulfil obligations related to EU accession, manage recovery processes, and respond to crises. Establishing a sustainable core of professionals capable of ensuring the long-term quality of reforms and decision-making.

Context and challenges. The EU accession negotiation process, large-scale recovery programmes, and the digitalization of public services require a qualitatively different level of competencies within state institutions, local self-government bodies, and civil society. Existing professional development formats are fragmented, weakly connected to universities, do not create a systematic professional personnel reserve, and are often unable to meet the scale of current challenges. One of the major risks is that legislation is adopted, but its effective implementation remains weak due to limited institutional and professional capacity among implementers.

Essence of the solution. Creation of a multi-level system for sustainable organizational capacity development that combines new academic and certificate programmes, hybrid learning models, and support for professional and territorial communities. This system would ensure familiarity with EU procedures and regulations, promote innovations that preserve Ukrainian identity, and provide continuous skills development for representatives of all levels of public administration, local self-government, business, and civil society. It would also include active recruitment and incentive mechanisms encouraging young people and responsible citizens to work in public administration.

Key components:

• New academic programmes – developed through partnerships between higher education institutions, the National Agency of Ukraine on Civil Service, think tanks, and CSOs: master’s and certificate programmes in European integration, public policy, recovery, cybersecurity, and human capital development.
• Certificate programmes for local self-government bodies and CSOs – focused on EU procedures and standards (acquis, structural funds, cohesion policy, public procurement, open government), with nationally recognized qualifications.
• Identity-preserving innovation – programmes dedicated to studying existing Ukrainian practices and integrating them into broader European approaches.
• Hybrid learning-by-doing models – practical policy laboratories; mentoring between experienced and new professionals; joint projects based on solving real community challenges.
• Support for communities of practice – thematic networks (security, European integration, social policy, culture), regional hubs, and peer-to-peer exchanges between Ukrainian communities and institutions from EU member states.
• Sustainable financing infrastructure for education, mentoring, and institutional support.

DEFENCE AND SECURITY

1. Security Partnership: Integrating Communities into the Total Defence System through Instruments of Shared Responsibility

Expected impact. Strengthening the capacity of communities to protect civilians and critical infrastructure; reducing civilian casualties; increasing preparedness for crises; strengthening trust between the state and society; improving the efficiency of resource allocation within the security system; and involving Volunteer Formations of Territorial Communities (VFTCs) in selected defence functions.

Context and challenges. The war has demonstrated that, alongside the Defence Forces, local communities assume a significant share of responsibility for protecting civilians at the local level. At the same time, local components of the security system – civil protection, air defence, and shelter networks – remain insufficiently integrated, limiting communities’ ability to respond rapidly to threats. There is a need to balance contributions from national and local budgets in financing security, while also engaging international partners in supporting communities in this area.

Essence of the solution. Creation of a security partnership system that provides communities with the tools, resources, and authority to participate in ensuring security within the framework of the total defence model.

Key components:

• Institutionalization of the role of communities within the total defence system – community security plans integrated into national security planning.  Ukrainian communities already de facto serve as Europe’s first line of security – without adequate tools or resources.

• Expanding the security-related powers of communities – participation in co-financing air defence systems and critical infrastructure protection; expansion and institutional support for existing practices involving VFTCs and mobile air defence fire units.

• Development of shelter networks and protected public spaces – modernization of existing shelters, construction of new facilities, and compliance with quality and accessibility standards.

2. Advocacy for the Creation of a Multi-Level Integrated Air and Missile Defence System

Expected impact. Strengthening the security of Ukraine and the rest of Europe; deterring further aggression; reducing destruction and civilian casualties; increasing energy and economic resilience; and decreasing both the scale and cost of future reconstruction. The initiative could become part of a new European security architecture.

Context and challenges. The absence of a coordinated system for data-sharing and needs-based response among partners reduces the effectiveness of protection efforts. Each new wave of attacks causes damage that significantly increases reconstruction costs and delays economic recovery.

Essence of the solution. Political partnership, coordination, and cooperation with key partners, manufacturers, and donors. Expanded financing through military assistance mechanisms, bilateral agreements, security support funds, joint production programmes, and scaling through innovation and technological development. Civil society plays the role of advocate for this solution before international partners – demonstrating the humanitarian and economic costs of inaction, documenting the consequences of attacks, and building public demand for long-term commitments from partners.

Key components:

• Political partnership, coordination, and cooperation – engagement with key partners, air defence manufacturers, and donors to coordinate the architecture of integrated air and missile defence systems under Ukraine’s leading role in defining priorities, with a clear mechanism for communicating needs and coordinating assistance; inclusion of critical infrastructure protection on the agenda of the Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC) 2026, as well as within the Ramstein and G7 formats.
• Expanded financing – mobilization of resources through military assistance mechanisms, bilateral agreements, and security support funds; development of joint production programmes and scaling through innovation, including domestic production of interceptor drones and electronic warfare (EW) systems.
• Investment in training and data-driven management – training of operators and technical personnel by Ukrainian training centres in partnership with international experts; development of a unified system for collecting and analyzing threat data to improve the speed and accuracy of responses.

3. A Transition System from Military Service to Civilian Life as an Element of the Security Sector

Expected impact. Reducing the time required for post-demobilization adaptation; increasing employment and social integration among veterans; and ensuring the effective use of military experience in the civilian sector. Establishing a predictable system for future waves of demobilization and mobilization. Strengthening defence capacity through maintaining veterans’ connection to the reserve and the broader security sector.

Context and challenges. Ukraine lacks a comprehensive transition system: existing approaches are fragmented, focused primarily on post-discharge support, and fail to account for the cyclical nature of the process. Service members may repeatedly transition between military service and civilian life. Defence sector systems and civilian services remain weakly integrated, and the transfer of individuals between them is not formalized. The anticipated wave-like nature of future demobilization processes will further intensify this challenge.

Essence of the solution. Creation of an integrated transition system that connects the defence sector and civilian institutions within a single coordinated framework – from active service to reintegration and potential return to the reserve. Transition is viewed not as a one-time event, but as a continuous and cyclical process of human capital management.

Key components:

• Early preparation and planning – preparing service members for civilian life while still in service through individualized transition planning, skills profiling, and career pathway development.
• A comprehensive support system – personalized support across three stages: during martial law (including wounded service members and families of the fallen), during the transition period (demobilization), and in peacetime (active-duty personnel). Formalized referral and transfer mechanisms between systems.
• Cross-sectoral integration – coordinated protocols for cooperation between the defence sector, the social sphere, and local communities, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities.
• Integration with the labour market – recognition of military competencies, retraining programmes, and partnerships with the private sector.
• A cyclical model linked to the reserve system – maintaining veterans’ connection to the security sector and ensuring readiness for potential re-engagement in service.

4. Integrating Veterans into Community Security Systems as a Mechanism of Local Resilience

Expected impact. Strengthening communities’ capacity to respond to security challenges; scaling successful local practices; and effectively utilizing veterans’ experience within civilian security environments. Building a prepared human resource base at the local level and strengthening the connection between the security sector and local communities.

Context and challenges. Communities – particularly frontline and de-occupied ones – face increasing security burdens without sufficient institutional capacity. At the same time, returning veterans possess practical experience in responding to crisis situations, yet this expertise remains unsystematically utilized. Existing practices for involving veterans in local security are fragmented, unsupported by a unified policy framework, and dependent on the initiative of individual communities.

Essence of the solution. Following demobilization, veterans should not simply “exit” the security sector, but remain part of it at the community level. This requires a comprehensive policy that combines a national regulatory framework with local implementation and defines coordinated roles, training mechanisms, and systems of cooperation.

Key components:

• Regulatory recognition of veterans’ roles – defining the roles of veterans in community security within national and local regulatory documents; integration into local security and development strategies; alignment with national resilience and Territorial Defence Forces policies.
• Local engagement programmes – development and scaling of community-level programmes; involvement of veterans in crisis planning, public and youth training, and the preparation of local resistance forces.
• Training and defined roles – development and implementation of short-term programmes enabling veterans to perform civilian security functions; training of veteran instructors.
• Coordination with institutions – establishment of working coordination channels between veteran organizations and local self-government bodies, the police, the State Emergency Service of Ukraine, and Territorial Defence Forces units; integration into civil protection systems.
• Incentives and support mechanisms – employment opportunities, as well as financial and organizational tools to encourage participation.

EUROPEAN INTEGRATION

1. Systemic Pro-European Advocacy for Ukraine in EU Member States

Expected impact.
Accelerating the negotiation process through the formation of political consensus; strengthening support for Ukraine’s accession among governments and parliaments of EU member states; reducing levels of scepticism among EU citizens; and institutionalizing long-term partnerships between Ukraine and EU countries.

Context and challenges.
There is no unified consensus among EU member states regarding Ukraine’s accession: Eurobarometer data demonstrates significant differences in levels of support between countries. The issue of Ukraine is actively used in domestic electoral campaigns, while media discourse in several countries is shaped around the perceived risks of enlargement – economic, migration-related, and social. The timeline and conditions for accession remain uncertain.

Essence of the solution.
Development and implementation of a multi-level advocacy strategy with a differentiated approach tailored to each EU member state, combining institutional engagement with peer-to-peer cooperation between professional communities.

Key components:

• Mapping and prioritization – assessing levels of support, identifying key stakeholders and risks in each country, and developing tailored advocacy strategies.
• Engagement with EU institutions – building coalitions of support within the European Parliament and at the level of national governments and parliaments.
• Communication with societies – information campaigns emphasizing the concrete benefits of Ukraine’s accession for each individual country.
• Discourse monitoring – tracking manipulation and political instrumentalization of the Ukraine issue during elections, and developing counter-strategies.
• Peer-to-peer networks – fostering partnerships between municipalities, think tanks, businesses, and civil society organizations.

EUROPEAN INTEGRATION

1. Systemic Pro-European Advocacy for Ukraine in EU Member States

Expected impact. Accelerating the negotiation process through the formation of political consensus; strengthening support for Ukraine’s accession among governments and parliaments of EU member states; reducing levels of scepticism among EU citizens; and institutionalizing long-term partnerships between Ukraine and EU countries.

Context and challenges. There is no unified consensus among EU member states regarding Ukraine’s accession: Eurobarometer data demonstrates significant differences in levels of support between countries. The issue of Ukraine is actively used in domestic electoral campaigns, while media discourse in several countries is shaped around the perceived risks of enlargement – economic, migration-related, and social. The timeline and conditions for accession remain uncertain.

Essence of the solution. Development and implementation of a multi-level advocacy strategy with a differentiated approach tailored to each EU member state, combining institutional engagement with peer-to-peer cooperation between professional communities.

Key components:

• Peer-to-peer networks – fostering partnerships between municipalities, think tanks, businesses, and civil society organizations.
• Mapping and prioritization – assessing levels of support, identifying key stakeholders and risks in each country, and developing tailored advocacy strategies.
• Engagement with EU institutions – building coalitions of support within the European Parliament and at the level of national governments and parliaments.
• Communication with societies – information campaigns emphasizing the concrete benefits of Ukraine’s accession for each individual country.
• Discourse monitoring – tracking manipulation and political instrumentalization of the Ukraine issue during elections, and developing counter-strategies.

2. Expert Support and Monitoring of European Integration Reforms

Expected impact. Bridging the gap between the adoption of legislation and its actual implementation; strengthening institutional capacity for reforms, interagency coordination, and transparency; and integrating civil society instruments into formal mechanisms for assessing Ukraine’s progress.

Context and challenges. The accession negotiation process represents a major challenge for Ukraine’s system of public administration. Institutional and human resource capacity to fulfil European integration obligations remains insufficient. Reforms are implemented unevenly due to an excessive number of priorities, fragmented responsibilities, and shortages of qualified personnel and resources. Legislative adoption often outpaces implementation because of weak secondary legislation and insufficient oversight. “Box-ticking” reforms undermine the trust of international partners.

Essence of the solution. Drawing donor attention to the importance of supporting public administration reform in order to strengthen Ukrainian institutions’ ability to fulfil European integration commitments. Civil society organizations participate in drafting legislation and secondary regulations, provide independent reform monitoring, and ensure public accountability. Their instruments – including shadow reports and benchmark monitoring – are integrated into formal mechanisms for evaluating Ukraine’s progress.

Key components:

• Participation in reform design – involvement of CSO experts in working groups on legislation and secondary regulatory frameworks.
• Independent analytics and impact assessment – preparation of analytical products and independent reform assessments for the government, parliament, and ministries; establishment of a unified public reform implementation monitoring platform (reform dashboard) for the government, parliament, local self-government bodies, and international partners.
• Regional European integration hubs – supporting communities in implementing EU norms and standards at the local level.
• Public communication – shifting the focus from the number of adopted laws to the quality of reform implementation.

3. Supporting Communities through Civil Society Organizations in Applying EU Standards and Participating in EU Programmes

Expected impact. Increasing the awareness and capacity of communities to apply EU standards, attract international funding, and build partnerships with communities in EU member states. Expanding residents’ participation in decision-making in line with the principle of subsidiarity.

Context and challenges. EU accession creates new opportunities for local communities, yet most local self-government bodies lack the necessary knowledge, methodologies, and contacts to take advantage of them. Community development strategies are often not aligned with EU priorities, while practices of public participation remain largely formalistic.

Essence of the solution. Civil society organizations provide communities with methodologies, data, and institutional support to update development strategies in accordance with EU approaches, implement good governance practices, and participate in EU programmes and networks.

Key components:

• Strategic planning in line with EU standards – support in developing data-driven strategies and SMART objectives, aligned with EU priorities.
• Public participation practices – participatory budgeting, open data initiatives, public hearings, local initiatives, public consultations, and the work of advisory and consultative bodies attached to local self-government bodies.
• Community resource hubs – training programmes, seconded experts, exchange of experience, and practical guides on European standards.
• Horizontal partnerships – development of twinning projects, participation in Interreg and other EU networks, preparation and support of grant applications, development of investment projects, and public-private partnerships.

HUMAN CAPITAL

1. Development of a Social and Affordable Housing System as a Foundation for Community Stabilization and Recovery

Expected impact. Ensuring housing stability for internally displaced persons (IDPs), veterans, and vulnerable groups; supporting their integration into community life; increasing economic activity; and reducing social tensions. Establishing a long-term system of social and affordable housing in line with European approaches.

Context and challenges. As a result of the war, more than 4 million Ukrainians are internally displaced, and a significant share of them lack access to stable housing. Existing programmes have limited coverage and fail to provide a systemic response: there is a shortage of affordable housing, fragmented programmes without sustainable models, unequal access between communities, and an absence of long-term financial instruments. Housing instability hinders the integration of IDPs and vulnerable groups and increases the risks of forced migration.

Essence of the solution. Transitioning from short-term solutions (temporary accommodation) to a systemic model of social and affordable housing – including rental housing – that combines infrastructure development with inclusive access and integration programmes.

Key components:

• Access and monitoring programmes – development of community-level programmes for the allocation of social housing to vulnerable groups (IDPs, people returning from temporarily occupied territories, veterans, etc.), as well as monitoring of their implementation.
• Quality standards – implementation of requirements related to energy efficiency, accessibility, and barrier-free design in accordance with EU standards.
• Financial instruments – development and implementation of preferential lending mechanisms, public-private partnerships, dedicated social housing funds, and related instruments.
• Integration with development policies – alignment of housing programmes with community employment strategies and local economic development policies.

2. Adaptive Support Systems and Deinstitutionalization: From Isolation to Inclusive Living

Expected impact. Reducing practices of isolation (institutional care and segregated environments), while increasing the number of people receiving support within their communities and maintaining connections to society, education, and the labour market. In the medium term, reducing repeated dependence on institutional systems, increasing individual autonomy, and strengthening community resilience.

Context and challenges. Ukraine’s care system still relies heavily on closed forms of institutional care, particularly residential institutions. These approaches limit participation in public life, fail to ensure autonomy, and do not comply with either modern human rights standards or EU practices. Community-based support systems remain fragmented, while the hospice network is underdeveloped.

Essence of the solution. Introduction of an adaptive support system in which assistance is provided to individuals within their familiar living environment.

Key components:

• Integrated community-based services – development of interconnected social, healthcare, educational, and economic services operating in coordination with one another.
• Case management – personalized support as the core mechanism of assistance; prevention of unjustified placement in institutional facilities; prioritization of support and care services provided at the place of residence.
• Deinstitutionalization – transformation and gradual reduction of institutional forms of care and segregated practices; development of supported living services, social support systems, and home-based assistance.
• Prevention of vulnerability – reorientation of the system from reactive responses toward crisis prevention.
• Cross-sectoral assessment of policies and decisions – integration of non-isolation criteria into education, social policy, and justice systems.

3. An Integrated System of Coordination, Accountability, and Resource Provision for Accessibility Policy

Expected impact. Transitioning from declarative implementation of accessibility policies to a systemic approach ensuring real accessibility. Strengthening coordination between the state, local self-government bodies, businesses, and CSOs, while increasing accountability for compliance with accessibility standards. Creating an environment in which accessibility becomes a fundamental norm in planning and service provision.

Context and challenges. Despite the existence of the National Accessibility Strategy until 2030, its implementation remains limited: effective coordination mechanisms between different levels of government and the private sector are lacking; measures are often implemented formally due to insufficient funding; and accountability mechanisms for non-compliance with standards remain ineffective. Accessibility continues to function more as a declaration than as a practical principle guiding public administration and decision-making.

Essence of the solution. Systematic implementation of accessibility policy through four interconnected elements: coordination, accountability, resource provision, and transformation of societal approaches.

Key components:

• Coordination mechanisms – cooperation between the state, local self-government bodies, businesses, and CSOs at both national and local levels.
• Integration across all policies – accessibility as a mandatory criterion in education, healthcare, infrastructure, transport, and social services.
• Monitoring and accountability – establishment of audit systems and accountability mechanisms for non-compliance with standards.
• Targeted financing – clearly defined funding sources and resource allocation instruments for implementation measures.
• Training and communication – professional development for public officials, engagement of businesses through incentive mechanisms, and information campaigns aimed at fostering a culture of accessibility.

4. Rehabilitation and Mental Health: Support for Everyone Affected by the War

Expected impact. Ensuring access to physical, psychological, and social support for everyone affected by the war – military personnel, veterans, families of the fallen and missing persons, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and others. Early identification of needs and continuity of access to services reduce pressure on the healthcare system and lower the risks of trauma becoming chronic. Strengthening communities’ capacity to plan and provide services contributes to reintegration and the return of people to active social and economic life.

Context and challenges. The war has created an unprecedented demand for mental health support. According to preliminary estimates, approximately 1.5 million veterans may return to civilian life after the end of active hostilities – and together with their families, the number of people requiring support could reach 5 million. At the same time, millions of civilians – including IDPs, residents of de-occupied territories, and families of the fallen – are already living with the consequences of trauma. The system faces critical barriers: the absence of an extensive network of rehabilitation centres, a shortage of mental health professionals, insufficient integration between medical and social services, and persistent stigma surrounding requests for psychological assistance.

Essence of the solution. Creation of an inclusive, multi-level support system covering all people affected by the war through coordinated medical, psychological, social, and professional assistance – from the community level to the national level – with priority given to early intervention and continuity of care pathways.

Key components:

• Expansion of the psychological support system – for all affected groups: military personnel, veterans, and civilians, including IDPs and families of the fallen.
• Creation of a “seamless care pathway” – integration of medical, psychological, and social services into a coordinated support system.
• Support for persons requiring care and caregivers – including veterans with disabilities, people without family support networks, and families with complex needs.
• Strengthening community capacity – improving the ability of communities to identify needs and plan rehabilitation services.
• Digitalization of services – ensuring convenient access regardless of place of residence.
• Destigmatization and public awareness – normalizing the use of psychological support services as part of a broader culture of resilience.

5. Quality Basic Education and Reducing Educational Inequalities

Expected impact. Improving students’ functional literacy and reducing socio-economic and gender gaps in key competencies through the development of updated educational standards aligned with the realities of wartime and post-war society. Strengthening the role of schools within communities not only as institutions of formal education, but also as spaces of support for students.

Context and challenges. The results of the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) study indicate critically low levels of basic competencies among 15-year-old Ukrainians, particularly in reading and mathematics. This problem is systemic: it existed before the war but has significantly worsened since the start of the full-scale invasion. The disparities are structural – between urban and rural students, and between boys and girls – reflecting broader social inequalities. Curricula remain overloaded, while textbooks continue to reproduce outdated stereotypes, including gender stereotypes. In rural communities, schools are often the only space available for young people, yet they lack both the resources and the mandate to provide non-formal education and meaningful extracurricular activities. The shortage of educational leaders undermines the system’s ability to transform from within.

Essence of the solution. Rethinking the priorities and core competencies of school education on the basis of evidence and data, rather than focusing solely on “learning loss recovery.” Reducing curricular overload and developing modernized educational materials free from gender stereotypes. Expanding the mandate of rural schools so they function as spaces for non-formal education and quality youth engagement. Supporting and developing educational leadership.

Key components:

• Rethinking core competencies and reducing curricular overload – based on data (PISA results and national assessments); development of high-quality educational materials in mathematics, literature, and other disciplines.
• Gender audit of textbooks and educational materials – removal of stereotypical representations and narratives that limit perceptions of roles, abilities, and opportunities for all children regardless of gender.
• Targeted career guidance that breaks down gender barriers – encouraging girls’ participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and boys’ engagement in the humanities and social fields; programmes that broaden rather than reinforce perceptions of “male” and “female” career trajectories.
• Expanding the mandate of rural schools – assigning responsibility for non-formal education, meaningful extracurricular programmes, and youth development as part of the educational mission.
• Support for educational leaders and teacher communities – leadership competitions, training and onboarding programmes, and supervision for school principals and education department administrators.

6. Adult Education and Reskilling: An Accessible System for Those Changing Their Career Pathways

Expected impact. Increasing participation in reskilling programmes among veterans, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and adults changing qualifications. Strengthening the connection between the labour market and education through the active involvement of businesses in identifying skills needs. Reducing economic losses caused by unrealized human potential.

Context and challenges. Interest in professional education remains low despite its potential to transform individuals’ economic trajectories. Existing learning formats are not adapted to the realities of busy adults – including veterans, IDPs, and parents. Businesses still tend to react to existing educational programmes rather than proactively shaping demand for competencies, resulting in a gap between what is taught and what the labour market actually requires.

Essence of the solution. An accessible adult education system combining learning-by-doing and lifelong learning approaches, flexible learning formats, and free educational opportunities. Businesses are engaged not as sponsors, but as equal partners in identifying competency needs and co-developing educational programmes.

Key components:

• Business involvement at the stage of defining needs – engaging businesses as equal partners in identifying required competencies and designing educational programmes, rather than merely consumers of ready-made solutions.
• Qualification centres for veterans – recognition of skills acquired during military service and their translation into civilian qualifications.
• Flexible learning formats – weekend, evening, and hybrid learning options tailored to busy adults, including veterans, IDPs, and parents.
• A system of free educational opportunities – vouchers, education credits, and similar instruments available to all adults rather than only specific target groups.

7. Culture as a Foundation for Social Cohesion, Resilience, and Community Development

Expected impact. Reducing the isolation of people affected by the traumatic experiences of war – including veterans, families of the fallen and missing persons, internally displaced persons (IDPs), children from frontline communities, and people released from captivity or occupation. Strengthening social ties through collective cultural practices; fostering a culture of remembrance that promotes unity; and developing new competencies among cultural professionals at the intersection of culture, social work, and mental health.

Context and challenges. The experience of war demonstrates that people need other people in order to preserve resilience. Art therapy, performing arts, participatory practices, museum and memorial programmes, and community-based cultural initiatives have shown high effectiveness as foundations for healing. At the same time, cultural actors and institutions currently engage with wartime experiences mainly through isolated projects, while communities often lack the methodologies and resources needed to organize such practices systematically. Critically low wages in the cultural sector further discourage youth engagement and the development of new professional competencies.

Essence of the solution. Creation of a support system for cultural institutions and professionals that enables transformative change within communities and recognizes culture as an integral part of testimony, social cohesion, recovery, and development. The solution integrates cultural practices into local policy frameworks.

Key components:

• Training programmes for cultural professionals – focused on trauma-informed approaches to working with audiences; support and scaling of evidence-based practices (visual arts, music, theatre, dance, writing, land art) in communities, rehabilitation centres, schools, and veteran centres.
• Memorial and dialogue practices – creation of local spaces of remembrance; support for oral history projects, museum and exhibition programmes that shape memorialization as a space for dialogue rather than division.
• Multifunctional cultural hubs in communities – libraries, cultural centres, museums, and public spaces with permanent programming: regular activities, inclusive events, programmes for veterans and IDPs, and support for relocated cultural institutions.
• Cultural integration of relocated communities – tools for preserving the identities of IDPs, national minorities, and relocated regions as part of broader cohesion and resilience policies.
• Support and mentoring programmes for young professionals – targeting cultural managers, librarians, museum professionals, and heritage preservation specialists willing to work in smaller communities; internship programmes within cultural institutions.
• Educational programmes for local administrators – supporting community leaders and officials responsible for developing cultural programmes within broader community development strategies.

COMMUNITY RESILIENCE

1. Strengthening Systemic Citizen Participation in Local Decision-Making

Expected impact. Increasing trust in governance decisions, strengthening social cohesion, improving the quality of strategic recovery planning, and ensuring more effective use of donor funding. Establishing sustainable practices of cooperation between local self-government bodies, civil society, and businesses, including representatives of national minorities and vulnerable groups.

Context and challenges. Despite the existence of legal participation mechanisms, their practical implementation varies significantly between communities: only 39% of civil society organizations consider themselves involved in recovery processes, while 34% assess their ability to influence decisions as low. Digital participation tools reach on average only 19% of residents across regions, while 26% are completely unaware of them. Mechanisms for involving representatives of national minorities are almost entirely absent. Digital platforms often function as isolated services rather than being integrated into actual decision-making processes.

Essence of the solution. Institutionalization of citizen participation at all levels of governance – from local mechanisms to national standards – through the reform of civic education and the integration of digital tools as full-fledged channels of influence rather than merely communication instruments.

Key components:

• Institutional participation mechanisms – public consultations, public hearings, local initiatives, advisory and consultative bodies, citizens’ assemblies, and other participatory practices; formal incorporation of participation mechanisms into territorial community statutes and local regulations.
• Digital tools – implementation and scaling of digital civic participation instruments aligned with EU and Council of Europe standards; integration into policy development and decision-making processes; inclusion of IDPs and vulnerable groups.
• Inclusion of national communities – mechanisms for the participation of minority representatives; introduction of the institution of Roma advisors and similar practices.
• Local self-government bodies competencies – training local officials in the application of participatory mechanisms; methodological support and exchange of practices between communities.
• Community-oriented recovery – grants and partnership projects supporting local citizen initiatives; engagement of international partners in supporting independent accountability mechanisms within recovery programmes.

2. Economic Capacity of Communities through Small Entrepreneurship, Social Enterprise, and Inclusive Financial Infrastructure

Expected impact. Strengthening the economic foundations of communities – especially frontline, de-occupied, and IDP-hosting communities – and fostering a new generation of entrepreneurs among youth, veterans, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and women. Civil society organizations (CSOs) serve as key support operators by training entrepreneurs, supporting grant implementation, conducting advocacy, and monitoring programme effectiveness.

Context and challenges. Small business constitutes the core infrastructure of local economic resilience, yet communities in eastern and southern Ukraine remain largely excluded from access to financial resources: banks avoid lending in frontline areas, local support infrastructure is weak, and social entrepreneurship has not become a widespread mechanism for promoting social stability and addressing social challenges. New legislation on veteran entrepreneurship creates a window of opportunity that requires effective programmes and institutional infrastructure – and this is precisely where the role of CSOs becomes indispensable.

Essence of the solution. An integrated policy for strengthening the economic capacity of communities in which CSOs simultaneously act as programme operators supporting entrepreneurs, advocates for systemic reforms, and independent monitors of effectiveness – covering the entire cycle from start-up grants and training to support for social entrepreneurship and integration into European programmes.

Key components:

• Start-up grants with mandatory support mechanisms – CSOs act as operators of mentoring and results monitoring, with priority given to frontline and de-occupied communities.
• Entrepreneurial skills development for youth, veterans, IDPs, and women – CSOs serve as providers of training programmes, school and university incubators, and mentoring networks; advocacy for the introduction of the EU Reinforced Youth Guarantee in Ukraine.
• Social entrepreneurship as a recovery instrument – CSOs advocate for the formal legal status of social enterprises, support businesses created by veterans and IDPs, and promote social contracting mechanisms with local self-government bodies.
• Integration with EU programmes – CSOs function as information hubs and provide support for applicants to programmes such as EU4Business, Interreg, and the Single Market Programme; advocacy before the European Commission (EC) to expand Ukraine’s access to these initiatives.
• Monitoring and open data – CSOs collect and publish data on the effectiveness of support programmes, ensuring accountability and creating an evidence base for donors and public authorities.

3. Energy Efficiency and Energy Stability of Communities

Expected impact. Strengthening the role of civil society in supporting communities’ transition toward energy resilience through the development of collective energy governance models, public oversight of resource efficiency, and advocacy for regulatory reforms.

Context and challenges. The energy vulnerability of communities is deepening due to outdated infrastructure, war-related damage, and the transformation of the community’s role – from passive consumer to potential co-producer of energy – which requires new governance models. Financial and institutional challenges, including limited local budgets, low capacity of local self-government bodies in energy management, insufficient understanding of energy service mechanisms, and fragmented support systems, require a combination of expert assistance and the active involvement of local initiatives and communities.

Essence of the solution. Civil society organizations can perform four complementary roles – taking into account the limited public availability of energy infrastructure data for security reasons: initiators of collective energy solutions (cooperatives), advocates for the introduction of energy management systems in communities, public watchdogs overseeing the efficiency of energy expenditures in the municipal sector, and intermediaries between communities and international support resources.

Key components:

• Energy cooperatives as a model of collective action – CSOs initiate and support the creation of energy cooperatives (both for energy production and shared energy consumption), through which residents and community institutions jointly invest in local energy generation – including solar power stations – and distribute generated energy collectively. CSOs act as organizers, not merely beneficiaries.
• Public monitoring and advocacy – monitoring the effective modernization of energy infrastructure and advocating for a simplified regulatory environment, particularly regarding energy service contracts and conditions for the development of cooperatives. Public oversight within municipal utility enterprises through the establishment and implementation of civic monitoring mechanisms.
• Training programmes in energy management – for representatives of supervisory boards, professional CSOs, local self-government bodies, and municipal institutions.