Attachments
Summary
Since the first edition of the CDAC snapshot of communication, community engagement and accountability (CCEA) across the Ukraine response was published in May 2022, a conscious effort has been made by international, national and local responders to ramp up CCEA action. Progress has been made in establishing coordination mechanisms and launching activities, particularly around accountability to affected people (AAP). As CCEA work continues to scale up on the ground, a greater focus and more effort are still needed on community-facing information and two-way communication; this should be accorded a higher priority than at present.
Progress since May 2022, remaining gaps and new opportunities
• There has been a good effort to coordinate AAP mechanisms among actors participating in AAP working groups and task forces, but coordination on communication and community engagement (CCE) that drive the eventual success of these processes remains overlooked. Coordination structures must address this gap and prioritise robust links between the needs of communities, as identified through feedback, and the provision of two-way communication to allow people to make informed decisions. Coordination of information, sharing of two-way communication channels and the engagement of diverse CCE stakeholders, including local media actors and media development organisations, can support this process.
• International response actors and established national and local networks and organisations continue to take different approaches to communicating and engaging with affected people. While efforts have been made to bridge these gaps and encourage local participation in international systems, progress has stalled. Barriers around language and terminology and establishing a common understanding of CCEA continue to challenge collaborative ways of working. Notably, during this review period, response actors have observed changes in local actors’ expectations and perceptions around the value of international coordination, further constraining engagement and coordination among CCEA responders.
• There remain urgent information needs, increasingly on cash assistance and topics related to support for longer-term integration of refugees. There is a particular gap in information provision in Russian and Romani dialects. In response to the identified preferences of affected people, digital communication and social media have been prioritised – but these have primarily been used as one-way methods of communication and two-way digital outreach is still lacking. This has resulted in low uptake of information, frustration among affected people trying to get in touch with aid providers and potential for misinformation. Greater use of digital communication and technologies to communicate with communities has opened opportunities, but it has also created access barriers for older people, people with disabilities and minority Roma refugees.
• The first report noted that the response had been led by the efforts and generosity of host communities, volunteers and local responders to help and accommodate refugees. While the generosity of host communities continues, there is a growing need for greater host community engagement by response actors so as to mitigate tensions, misinformation and rumours in order to support the long-term integration of refugees. This is especially the case as fatigue is starting to set in among host communities and local actors that have been active throughout the response.