Scale and geography
The proportion of IDPs in the total population remains at 12.5%; 69% of them have been displaced for more than two years, and the median duration of displacement exceeds three years. Over the three months preceding the data collection, 164,000 new displacements were recorded—this represents approximately 4% of all IDPs.
The largest numbers of IDPs are concentrated in the Dnipropetrovsk region — 611,000 people, or 16% of the total — and the Kharkiv region — 469,000 people, or 12%. Kyiv and the Kyiv region together account for a further 17%.
The origins of the displacement remain consistently concentrated. Five main areas of origin account for 75% of the total IDP flow — approximately 2.87 million people. The Donetsk region alone accounts for almost a third of the total — 31%, followed by Kharkiv with 16%, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson with 11% each, and Luhansk with 6%.
Among those who had been displaced in the three months prior to data collection, 21% had already been displaced several times during that same period. The three regions with the highest levels of displacement—Donetsk (38%), Zaporizhzhia (19%) and Kharkiv (13%)—together account for 70% of all new displacement.
Who are the IDPs from the occupied territories?
A distinct and particularly vulnerable group among the displaced population consists of those who have fled areas that are fully or partially occupied by Russian forces. This group accounts for 58% of all IDPs — approximately 2,246,000 people. It is concentrated mainly in the Dnipropetrovsk, Kyiv, Kharkiv and Odesa regions.
Among households from the occupied areas, 59% include older people aged 60 and over. Among those who were displaced less than a year ago, this figure rises to 66%. 41% report having at least one person with a disability, and 61% report having members with chronic illnesses.
These people also express greater uncertainty about the future. They are less likely to state that they have no intention of integrating — 22% compared with 33% among IDPs from non-occupied areas — and are more likely to say that their decision will depend on how the situation develops.
Where do people plan to go?
87% of IDPs plan to remain in their current place of residence for the next three months following the data collection. However, the picture is more complex in the long term.
56% plan to stay where they are: 37% intend to integrate, whilst a further 19% plan to stay without seeking to integrate. 12% want to return to their place of origin, 6% plan to move elsewhere, and 26% are still undecided.
Among those planning to return, 78% are prepared to do so only once active hostilities have ceased. It is noteworthy that the desire to integrate increases with the duration of displacement, whereas those who have been displaced more recently are much more likely to consider moving on.
Winter has exacerbated the needs
The winter of 2025–2026 significantly altered the pattern of needs among IDPs. The lack of access to generators and power banks rose from 34% to 57% — the sharpest increase across all categories. The need for housing rose from 29% to 35%, compared with 7% among the non-displaced population.
Overall, 87% of IDPs report at least one unmet need. The most common needs include generators and power banks (57%), medicines (42%) and housing (35%) — all of these figures are consistently higher than among the non-displaced population.
The duration of displacement also determines the nature of the most pressing needs. The need for healthcare services is most acute in the first few months following displacement, whereas the need for housing increases over time — from 9% in the first six months to 12% among those who have been displaced for more than two years.
Among those who have not been displaced, 80%
Survival strategies and limits to resilience
84% of IDP households had either implemented or exhausted livelihood-based survival strategies, compared with 73% of returnees and 74% of non-displaced people.
In the 30 days prior to the data collection, the most common strategies were spending savings (54%) and reducing the use of utilities—such as firewood, coal, electricity or gas (52%). 43% cut back on healthcare costs, particularly on medicines.
Among those who can no longer rely on specific strategies, savings are most often the first to run out: 16% report that this option has been completely exhausted. A further 9% can no longer move to lower-quality accommodation, whilst 8% have already sold their property, productive assets or means of transport.
The data indicate that the situation of IDPs has stabilised at a persistently high level of vulnerability — a pattern that has been observed since October 2024. This does not suggest an improvement: crisis and emergency strategies have become an integral part of IDP households’ economies.
The most vulnerable among the vulnerable
Among all groups of IDPs, there are those who bear the heaviest burden. Households with members with disabilities are more likely to resort to crisis or emergency coping strategies — 69%, compared with 53% among households without such members. This is due to a higher rate of emergency survival measures (33% versus 22%) and greater cuts in healthcare spending — 57% versus 41%.
Single-parent households report adopting crisis or emergency measures in 66% of cases, compared with 59% among other households. They are significantly more likely to sell their possessions (30% versus 15%), borrow money or buy food on credit (29% versus 13%), and cut back on education expenses (21% versus 10%).
IDPs considering relocation are significantly more likely to cite a lack of energy solutions (69% versus 56%), opportunities to earn an income (52% versus 32%) and housing (49% versus 33%). This profile suggests that the decision to move is driven by an inability to maintain basic living conditions and continuity of healthcare, rather than solely by security concerns.