A new national protection review prepared by UNHCR in collaboration with the Office of the Ombudsman of Ukraine and partners highlights the profound vulnerability of a significant portion of the population. It provides clear guidance for the state and humanitarian organisations. The survey, conducted in March-April 2025 on a representative sample of households and supplemented by interviews with key informants, shows high levels of insecurity, widespread psychosocial problems, limited mobility and increased housing and economic vulnerability, especially among internally displaced persons. These findings have direct implications for preparations for the autumn-winter period and for recovery planning.
protection-survey-1-final-ukrRead also: Funding for humanitarian aid in Ukraine covered only a third of needs
How the research was conducted and who was surveyed
The analysis is based on a combined approach: a quantitative household survey with a geographically stratified sample (a total of 4,073 respondents in 4,791 households, 95% confidence level, margin of error ~1.8%) and qualitative interviews with 166 key informants in 50 communities. The study combined telephone and face-to-face interviews, including 915 face-to-face interviews in temporary accommodation, allowing for a separate analysis of the situation of IDPs. The authors specify that the data is based on respondents’ self-reports and is partly pioneering in its methodological approach, so the results are presented with methodological notes.
Safety: more than half feel unsafe
55% of respondents said they did not feel safe or felt only partially safe — the main factors of concern include the overall military situation, air strikes and temporary occupation. For more than a quarter of respondents, the negative impact of the security situation on their daily lives is “high,” and about 7–10% (higher rates among people with special needs and in single-parent families) reported that they are “coping poorly” or “barely coping” with the consequences. Regional differences are noticeable: the highest levels of perceived threat are in Kyiv, the south and the east; the lowest are in the centre and the west.
Read also: Life, adaptation and plans to return. How Ukrainians live abroad
Evacuation and intentions to return
About 20% of respondents live within 30 kilometres of the contact line; more than half said they would leave their homes if the security situation got worse, while about 19% said they wouldn’t leave. Among IDPs, only a small proportion (over 7%) plan to return “immediately”, while the majority either do not intend to return or are undecided. Among those who intend to evacuate, approximately 85% expect to do so independently or with the support of family/neighbours, while about 14% said they would not be able to evacuate without outside help — a signal for strengthening state evacuation mechanisms and services for vulnerable groups.
Mental health and social resilience
Mental health and psychosocial security issues affect almost half of respondents: 43% reported corresponding concerns — stress, anxiety, depression. These problems are more common among women, older people, and people with special needs; in single-person households, the rates are quite high (over 60%). For about 31% of those with mental health complaints, the negative impact is felt daily and is approaching the limits of resilience. This situation requires a large-scale adaptation of national and local psychosocial support programmes with a focus on vulnerable groups.
Read also: “Ukrainians are amazing in their resilience” – an interview with Daniel Wallinder, country representative of the Swedish Red Cross
Freedom of movement and infrastructure barriers
Almost 15% of respondents face restrictions on freedom of movement; risk groups include people with disabilities, older people and single-person households. The main obstacles are related to security risks, inaccessibility of public infrastructure and transport, lack of assistive devices, and problems with documents. The lack of transport or its financial inaccessibility particularly affects those with special needs and causes difficulties in accessing medical, social, and legal services.
Housing, property rights and temporary accommodation
IDPs demonstrate higher housing vulnerability: more than half of IDPs live in rented accommodation or temporary accommodation — only 77% of IDPs own their homes, compared to 84% of non-displaced persons. De facto, 17% of respondents reported complete destruction of their homes, and access to documents and compensation schemes remains a significant obstacle: about 50% report barriers to accessing their rights to compensation. In temporary accommodation, some residents remain due to the cost of other housing options or uncertainty about alternatives. These data highlight the need for diverse housing solutions and better information about compensation programmes.
Read also: How Ukrainians perceive art
Employment, social assistance and income
Unemployment among respondents reaches about 19%; among those who do not have a job, most are not registered with the employment service. For 63% of the population, state social support, in particular pensions, is an important source of income; IDPs rely more on social and humanitarian assistance than those who have returned or have not been displaced. Barriers to employment include a lack of available jobs, a skills shortage and a lack of flexible working hours, which particularly affects women and those who combine work with caregiving.
Digital access, participation in public life and access to justice
Most respondents (approximately 88%) have digital devices, although for part of the population (especially people over 60), digital literacy and physical access remain a barrier. Digital tools are used to obtain information about state and humanitarian aid, for online learning and communication. At the same time, about a third of respondents are not confident that they can navigate the justice system without assistance; this reinforces the importance of free legal aid and the role of paralegals in overcoming documentary barriers, particularly with regard to property registration and access to compensation.
Read also: Stable but vulnerable. How the civil sector was perceived in the 2024 CSO Index
Recommendations proposed by the authors of the survey
The study formulates four high-level areas of action: supporting evacuation and improving information for vulnerable groups; prioritising assistance to those with the highest barriers to access; strengthening community-level protection mechanisms; and integrating assistance focused on long-term displacement solutions — in particular through a national internal displacement strategy, reform of the IDP registry, increasing housing availability and expanding social integration programmes. The authors also suggest strengthening psychosocial support programmes, adapting evacuation mechanisms to the needs of older people and people with disabilities, and investing in barrier-free infrastructure and digital inclusion.
What does this mean for policy and humanitarian response?
The survey sends a clear message: without systematic coordination of state reforms and humanitarian programmes, most vulnerable groups risk being overlooked. A combination of short-term measures is needed — improving information about evacuation and access to services, expanding mobile and remote services — and long-term solutions: reforming housing mechanisms, guaranteeing access to documents and jobs, and integrating social support. Government agencies, local communities and recovery partners must coordinate their actions so that the response to humanitarian needs is accompanied by the gradual recovery and social integration of IDPs.
Read also: Locusts are attacking Ukrainian fields – farmers are warned about the threat to crops
