The war has made charity in Ukraine a truly mass phenomenon — for the fourth year in a row, more than half of citizens are involved in providing assistance. A new study of the charity sector in 2025, conducted by the Zagoriy Foundation in collaboration with the Generous Tuesday initiative, has revealed significant shifts in Ukrainians’ motivations, barriers to donating, levels of trust in foundations, and preferences for local initiatives. The study also analysed the emotions of donors, the experiences of recipients of aid, and the role of business in philanthropy. The survey (quantitative N=2400 and qualitative focus groups) was conducted against the backdrop of society’s fatigue from the protracted war and a certain crisis of confidence, which has affected all aspects of the volunteer movement.
Changes in philanthropists’ motivation: from impulse to planning
According to the study, Ukrainian donors are gradually shifting from spontaneous, emotionally charged assistance to more planned and regular support. The reason for this shift is not so much a more conscious attitude as the depletion of resources and emotional fatigue after years of intense volunteer activity. In other words, many are no longer able to help “every time they are called upon” and are instead allocating their energy and resources more strategically. Despite fatigue, the main motives remain patriotic and humanitarian. People are motivated by a desire to preserve their country and support the military. As one active volunteer said, “volunteers are love for the Fatherland.” Personal stories also play a role: some people became involved in charity work after losing relatives or friends in the war or because their loved ones are serving in the army, feeling a duty to help their comrades. Many respondents mention empathy for those suffering from the war: “We sleep in warm beds… it’s scary to think about the conditions the boys are in,” shared an active donor. At the same time, charity has become a kind of “routine of good” for people – a norm of life even in the rear. One of the survey participants emphasised that “we all have to donate… it should be like brushing your teeth,” emphasising a sense of personal duty. The study confirms that Ukrainians help primarily out of an inner calling, not “for show,” and perceive charity not as a feat, but as something self-evident. This attitude even helps the donors themselves cope with stress and powerlessness in the face of circumstances: “I have to help → I help → I feel a little better.”
Read also:
Safe schools and few psychologists — what communities in five regions need
Barriers to donation and volunteering
Not everyone who wants to help has the opportunity to do so. In 2025, financial and psychological barriers came to the fore. Ukrainians cited their own financial instability as the main obstacle (59% of respondents), followed by distrust of charitable foundations (52%). The proportion of financial reasons increased compared to last year, which is understandable given the economic difficulties of wartime. Lack of money discourages even motivated people. “Many people cannot afford to help because they are barely making ends meet,” explain the volunteers. Another significant obstacle is emotional burnout and fatigue from constant fundraising. “People are tired of the war, of fundraising, of volunteering… the situation is only getting worse,” says a focus group participant, describing the decline in enthusiasm in society. Some openly admit that they feel like they have already “done their part” as donors: “Many people say: we are already donors through our taxes. We pay taxes, military fees… in fact, all working people are donors,” said a man who no longer donates or volunteers.
A significant barrier is the crisis of trust (more on this in the next section). Scandals and negative experiences undermine the desire to donate. Focus groups revealed widespread scepticism about the honesty of fundraising: people mention pseudo-volunteers, dubious “schemes” and cases of misuse of funds. For example, one respondent recounted how they received humanitarian aid of poor quality: “I opened the cereal and was shocked… there were worms and moths.” Such stories, even if isolated, spread on social media and undermine trust in the charitable sector as a whole. Separately, respondents mention the lack of punishment for abuse: “When he came to power, he promised: everyone will be punished… has even one person been punished?” said a woman who lost faith after several disappointments. The feeling of injustice (“the honest give, while the dishonest profit”) becomes a significant demotivator. Taken together, these factors lead to some Ukrainians reducing their charitable giving or not participating in it at all.
Read also:
It’s a calling. How volunteering became part of doctor Natalia Kyrytsia’s life
Trust in funds and the choice in favour of personal initiatives
The crisis of confidence that had been brewing in recent years manifested itself particularly sharply in 2025. Surveys showed a shift in public preferences: Ukrainians shifted their focus of trust from large, well-publicised foundations to local volunteer initiatives. The decline in trust hit large-scale and corporate foundations the hardest. Although the recognition of well-known organisations remains high, people have become more discerning: the more transparency and accountability, the more trust. Society is already “voting with its hryvnia” not for a big name, but for a real reputation for transparency. “In 2025, Ukrainians will trust not the biggest, but the most understandable,” the authors of the study conclude.
Funds with strong personal brands (such as Serhiy Prytula’s Fund or Come Back Alive) still enjoy significant support thanks to clear reporting and visible results, but even they have lost some of the public’s trust. The reason is a lack of “emotional closeness” and limited communication: people want to feel a personal connection with those they trust with their money. Instead, the highest level of trust now lies with specific individuals, personal acquaintances, or local opinion leaders. The “pyramid of trust” constructed by sociologists places local initiatives at the top: neighbours, colleagues, and volunteer acquaintances. “We have a group on Viber… everyone knows me and trusts that I won’t steal,” said an active donor about fundraising in his building. This quote reflects a general trend: transparency “within arm’s reach” is valued more than a big name somewhere at the top. People trust large foundations and media personalities selectively — mostly those who have been in the public eye for years and report impeccably on their activities. “Trust goes to those who have been working for years, providing photo reports… people don’t have that kind of trust in new organisations,” notes one survey participant. On the other hand, Ukrainians have almost no trust in government structures and officials in the charitable sphere – this level of trust is consistently the lowest.
Read also:
Money follows the teacher. What the world thinks about how the new education funding mechanism will work
How Ukrainians donate: forms, frequency, amounts and emotions
Despite these difficulties, most Ukrainians continue to help the army and those affected. Over the past 12 months, 62% of citizens have engaged in charity work (donating money, goods or volunteering). Financial support prevails among them: more than three-quarters of donors transfer money to charity (although this figure is slightly lower than last year). Men are more likely to donate money, while women often help materially (with food, clothing, etc.). People who do not have wealth compensate for this in other ways – by giving things or their own time and labour. In the structure of charity, material and time-based forms play an important role as channels for those who “do not have extra money but want to help”. Thus, 20% of active philanthropists volunteer directly – weaving camouflage nets, repairing equipment, delivering aid or providing professional services on a voluntary basis. Another 9% contribute informationally – organising meetings, spreading appeals, and participating in actions to support volunteers.
The frequency of assistance varies. Almost 40% of the philanthropists surveyed donate or volunteer at least once a month, and one in five do so weekly. There are also those (about 2%) who devote themselves to charity almost every day. At the same time, a significant portion act as opportunities arise: one-third help once a quarter or less. This more moderate, systematic schedule reflects the above-mentioned trend of transitioning from impulsive acts to regular support.
The amount of donations has also decreased slightly compared to last year. The average donor now gives about 480 UAH per month, while in 2024 this amount reached ~840 UAH. The median amount of a single donation is approximately 240 UAH. That is, half of the contributions are less than 240 UAH, which confirms the thesis about the “massiveness but pettiness” of Ukrainian charity. Only about 12% of the population can afford large one-time transfers of more than 1,000 UAH. Younger people and men generally donate larger amounts than older people and women: for example, among young people, the share of small donations (<500 UAH) is smaller (48%), and donations of 1,000+ UAH are larger than in older groups. Education and income level have an expected impact: philanthropists with higher education and high incomes tend to give more money, while pensioners or housewives are more likely to limit themselves to providing assistance with items or small amounts.
What emotions do Ukrainians experience when helping others? Mostly positive and conscious ones. The most common feeling is that of a duty fulfilled: 44% of donors say that charity is dictated by an inner need to help. About a third feel relief and moral satisfaction from having done a good deed. For a quarter of those surveyed, belief in reciprocity is important — the understanding that today I am helping, and tomorrow, perhaps, someone will help me. Approximately one in five finds peace of mind, balance, and even joy or emotional uplift in charity. These emotions resonate with the words of volunteers: “The most valuable thing is to see eyes that become joyful and happy after tears,” “I felt proud of myself, of my family… that I am a patriot,” they share their “inner reward” from helping. Only a small minority of philanthropists admit that they feel no emotions or, conversely, feel guilty that they are not doing enough (less than 5% in total). Thus, for the vast majority of Ukrainians, charity has an emotional component — it gives meaning, relieves anxiety, and restores a sense of control over the situation. It is no coincidence that experts note that helping others has become a way for society to cope with the shared grief of war.
Read also:
Resale or New Build: What Do Displaced People Choose in Rivne
Aid recipients: gratitude and problems through the eyes of beneficiaries
The study included a separate survey of those who personally received charitable assistance during the war (internally displaced persons, affected families, etc.). Their responses demonstrate a high level of gratitude – 96.5% of recipients are generally satisfied with the support provided. However, there was some criticism of certain aspects. About two-thirds of respondents encountered certain difficulties when applying for assistance. Most often, people complained about excessive bureaucracy: 24% said that in order to receive support, they had to collect many documents and go through complicated procedures. This is especially true for official state aid programmes, where red tape discourages the most vulnerable. Another common problem is logistical: 11% of respondents indicated that it was physically difficult for them to get to the distribution point or carry the items they received. Another 9% mentioned long queues, and 5% mentioned unclear rules and conditions for receiving support. Some encountered unfair distribution of resources (3%), while others remembered poor-quality or untimely assistance (2%). A few people (2%) even described feeling humiliated when receiving charity, probably due to the condescending attitude of some employees or volunteers.
Despite these negative aspects, the vast majority of beneficiaries rated the assistance positively. People say that without the support of volunteers and foundations, they would not have been able to survive these difficult times. An interesting point: many recipients noted that, in addition to direct material assistance (food, clothing, medicine), non-material support – communication, advice, emotional support – was also important to them. A significant proportion of respondents reported receiving counselling, psychological or educational assistance, often in combination with humanitarian aid. These types of support provide a very high level of satisfaction, as people feel that there is genuine concern for their situation, rather than just the distribution of necessary items. This, incidentally, is the strength of volunteer initiatives: they are more flexible and humane than bureaucratic government programmes. IDPs (displaced persons) in the survey mentioned queues and the difficulty of getting to aid distribution points slightly more often, as well as cases of dissatisfaction with the quality of the products received or unfairness in the distribution of resources. This is a signal to charitable organisations about what needs to be worked on: simplifying processes, improving communication and quality control. In general, recipients highly appreciate any support and express trust in those who help them – many of them later became volunteers or donors themselves, continuing the chain of kindness.
Read also:
World AIDS Day. Why Ukrainians aged 55+ are at risk and how the war has changed the fight against HIV
Corporate social responsibility: impact on trust and consumer behaviour
Today, Ukrainians value not only charitable volunteers, but also businesses. Since the start of the full-scale war, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has ceased to be merely an image-building option for companies – it now influences consumers’ purchasing decisions. The study revealed an interesting fact: 71% of Ukrainians said they would choose products from a company that had completely withdrawn from the Russian market, even if they were more expensive. Only 7% said they are guided solely by price. In other words, the majority “vote with their hryvnia not only for goods, but also for values.” The ethical position of a business during the war — whether it helps the Armed Forces, supports displaced persons, or has severed ties with the aggressor — has become a basic criterion for trust in a brand. In 2025, consumers expect companies to play an active social role. Business charity is primarily associated with helping the army (this is number one for most respondents). In second place are social programmes for vulnerable groups (assistance to families of the deceased, support for people with disabilities, etc.). Interestingly, the existence of such programmes particularly influences the choices of older people (60+), while young people value a company’s principled patriotic stance more. In general, it is now important for Ukrainians of all ages that businesses clearly define where they stand. As the researchers conclude, in 2025, “a company’s ethical behaviour during the war will become a basic criterion for trust and will be converted into consumer choice.” Brands that have failed to meet public expectations (for example, by continuing to operate in Russia or being caught evading taxes/donations) are losing Ukrainian customers regardless of the quality of their products. On the other hand, businesses that have distinguished themselves through charitable projects or support for the front lines are gaining loyalty. In fact, a new culture of consumption is emerging, where a company’s reputation and social responsibility are no less important than the price-quality ratio of its products.
Read also:
COP30 conference moved forward on adaptation financing, but stalled on fossil fuels
