Less Than 1% of Humanitarian Funding for Ukraine Goes Directly to Local Organizations
(KYIV/WASHINGTON)—Almost three years since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, international actors still monopolize humanitarian response funding, leadership, and policy influence. Despite global commitments to localize humanitarian responses and clear cost efficiencies in doing so, less than 1 percent of almost $10 billion in humanitarian funding tracked by the UN has gone directly to local and national non-governmental organizations (L/NNGOs) in Ukraine. Even though donors perceive L/NNGOs as more risky – and say this is one major factor holding back direct support – across 32 donors, INGOs, and UN Agencies, none reported a substantial, confirmed case of corruption by Ukrainian partners to date, according to a new survey.
East SOS and Refugees International’s Annual Ukraine Localization Survey 2024, out today, examines the state of localization in Ukraine. Notable findings include:
- International responders acknowledge that L/NNGOs do the majority of the frontline delivery work but receive a minority of funding.
- Cash and Voucher Assistance (CVA), the largest single type of internationally financed humanitarian intervention in Ukraine, is overwhelmingly managed by UN agencies and INGOs, with only 3.4% handled end-to-end by L/NNGOs.
- Most donors are trying to fund L/NNGOS directly, but progress is limited.
- Most donors do not track key partnership metrics amongst their grantees.
- L/NNGO cluster participation has improved, but gaps persist. At the same time, L/NNGOs report a high level of aid coordination between themselves.
- International respondents know what provisions and practices are vital for localization, but most have not changed their written policies or monitoring approaches.
- Localization plans and staff are proliferating, but L/NNGOs are often not involved in the design of localization strategies.
“For the first time, we have data that shows Ukrainian aid organizations are bucking the perception and reality of corruption in their country,” said Nicholas Noe, senior fellow at Refugees International. “The Ukraine humanitarian response is now probably one of the most monitored and audited responses in modern history, with almost $10 billion delivered through the internationally led aid mechanisms alone. Our survey found no substantial, confirmed cases of corruption amongst Ukrainian partners, which should encourage donors to double down on their support for Ukrainian responders and provide more funding to them directly in 2025.”
Direct funding for L/NNGOs is widely recognized as crucial for improving humanitarian responses around the world. Doing so avoids the comparatively costly, circuitous use of intermediaries like UN agencies and international NGOs, and puts those who know the terrain best in front as leaders: local and national responders. Direct funding from donors also improves the resilience and durability of L/NNGOs by providing them with more funding to cover their overhead costs while strengthening their long-term capacity. This helps to ensure that local and national responders will endure even after international aid declines.
“Ukrainian aid organizations operate effectively at both a local and national level,” explained Yuliia Matviichuk, human rights coordinator at East SOS. “Sixty percent of L/NNGOs we surveyed are active across the majority of oblasts, and all cooperate regularly with international partners. However, the inflexibility of international structures, excessive red tape, and the limited influence of L/NNGOs over programs jeopardize the efficiency and effectiveness of aid delivery. It is time to strengthen the role of Ukrainian organizations by fostering equitable partnerships, further building out transparent anti-corruption systems, and ensuring that Ukrainian NGOs in the field take the lead across program design, implementation, and overall strategy development. After all, they are best placed to understand the context and the real needs of people on the ground. Localization is not a trend but a critical necessity to achieve sustainable change.”
“Despite increased representation and participation of national NGOs in the coordination activities, they still struggle to be effectively included in the international decision-making mechanisms,” said Ewa Wieliczko, an independent consultant who co-authored the report. “Over 70% of all humanitarian clusters interviewed reported that national NGOs now constitute more than half of cluster members. At the same time, UN and INGOs still hold the main coordination roles and are predominantly responsible for coordination, cluster membership, strategy building and decision-making and are far more likely to receive dedicated funding from donors for those activities.”
The Annual Ukraine Localization Survey was made possible by a grant from the Center for Disaster Philanthropy (CDP).
“At CDP, we encourage philanthropy to support local and national actors in Ukraine or contribute to a pooled fund that can get funding to local organizations,” said Sharad Aggarwal, vice president of fund management & coalition building at CDP. “We have prioritized working with local and national actors, as well as non-traditional humanitarian actors, including human rights groups, advocacy organizations, and other civil society actors that existed before the invasion and have become humanitarians overnight. These partners are often better positioned to tackle root causes of vulnerability and discrimination that existed pre-conflict. They know the context well and have deep roots and trust within networks established over time. We work with these organizations to address the root causes of vulnerability to ensure an equitable and inclusive recovery for all.”
For more information or to schedule an interview, please contact Etant Dupain at edupain@refugeesinternational.org.