After more than four years of full-scale war, Ukraine still has one of the most active and trusted civil societies in the region. Ukrainians volunteer, donate and mobilise on a remarkable scale. About 80% trust volunteer organisations and 61% trust NGOs, well above pre-invasion levels. Organisations can register in minutes through an app, criticise the authorities openly and influence policy. The July 2025 protests that helped defend the anti-corruption bodies NABU and SAPO showed that civic pressure still works in wartime, and the government treats CSOs as key partners in EU accession. The weak points lie in how the system works in practice, not in the law. Consultations are often late or selective and favour large national organisations over local ones. The sector also depends heavily on foreign donors: when US assistance was suspended in 2025, more than half of the organisations affected could not replace the lost funding.
Civic Environment Report 2026: Ukraine
Mostly enabling
| Standard | Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Cluster A — Institutional and Political Environment and Narratives of CSOs | 3 | cluster average |
| A1 Equal treatment | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| A2 Political recognition as partners | 4 | Enabling |
| A3 Refrained authorities from smearing | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| A4 No weaponization of state powers and good governance principles | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| A5 Transparent and open public institutions | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| Cluster B — Legal and Financial Framework for CSOs | 3.2 | cluster average |
| B1 Free establishment and operation | 4 | Enabling |
| B2 CSOs enjoy a safe space and protection from arbitrariness | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B3 Liberality of resourcing | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B4 Enabling fiscal environment | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B5 Free expressions of criticism | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| Cluster C — Public Engagement and Perceptions towards the Work of CSOs | 3.6 | cluster average |
| C1 Citizens' trust | 4 | Enabling |
| C2 Pluralistic presentation in media | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| C3 Free engagement | 4 | Enabling |
| C4 CSOs embedded in communities | 4 | Enabling |
| C5 Freedom of assembly | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| Cluster D — CSOs as Policy Makers | 2.8 | cluster average |
| D1 Right to participate in decision-making including in the policy cycle | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| D2 Timely consultations and equal participation | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| D3 Policies encourage cooperation with CSOs | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| D4 Free advocacy and watchdogging | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| D5 Government listens | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| Composite index (average of cluster scores) | 3.15 | between mostly enabling and enabling |