These ambitions require overview and mutual understanding within the philanthropic sector. While useful data on Ukraine-related support from Europe-based funders existed for 2022, largely due to voluntary efforts by colleagues at the Philanthropy Europe Association, this level of data maintenance could not be sustained in subsequent years. As a result, a general view of activities across the philanthropic landscape was gradually lost. In parallel, the need for learning about and with Ukraine, as well as for more effective collaboration in the evolving war context became evident.

This situation intensified in 2025, when USAID mostly withdrew from Ukraine, leaving many civil society organizations and support structures with significantly reduced or no financial means. As international development funding became more politicized and volatile, philanthropic work gained greater visibility, accompanied by increasing requests for partnerships. Thus, the various effects of the USAID withdrawal further underscored the need for stronger coordination among foundations.

Complexity on different levels

Is coordinating philanthropic activity in this war context more complex? Usual practices of network coordination—creating a sense of belonging, establishing processes that deliver value, and facilitating towards shared directions—remain largely the same. However, the conditions under which these practices take place differ. Developments on the ground and in international politics evolve rapidly, so there is often no stable basis for planning.

However, this perspective primarily reflects an internal network view. It shifts when engaging with civil society partners in Ukraine. There, the modes of cooperation constantly adapt to the war context and do not naturally match those of funders from outside the country. The sense of urgency can be different, as can be visions of what makes work impactful. These tensions add to the complexity of the work.

They also affect those involved on a personal level—not only coordinating staff but also colleagues working in philanthropic organizations. Many have family members and friends in the country. Balancing urgent support with investments into long-term recovery is therefore not only a strategic consideration, but also a lived tension. This dynamic extends to coordination itself: what level of investment in coordination can be justified in the context of ongoing urgency?

The process of supporting members in shaping Foundations for Ukraine therefore differed from many other network-building efforts with philanthropic organizations in which we had been involved. It required more care within the coordination team and in working with members, as well as greater focus on how Ukraine is looked at from a strategic perspective in every member organization.

Ukraine’s reality as an opportunity for philanthropy

The density of emergency response, recovery efforts, and of the ongoing societal transformation in Ukraine also creates an opportunity for philanthropy to evolve its practice. The country has been praised for its capacity to adapt to the constantly shifting battlefield. Equal attention should be paid to how civic actors have contributed to the country’s resilience, and how civil society organizations have evolved in relation to domains of the state and the economy.

This raises questions that extend beyond the immediate context: what forms of solidarity and support have emerged, and how might these shape societal structures in the future of the country? The experiences and learnings from civil society in Ukraine may very well prove relevant in other contexts as well. Philanthropy, as both a supporter and a part of civil society, has a pivotal role to play in facilitating this exchange of knowledge and experience.

Creating ambitious synergies

In this broader perspective, coordination among philanthropic actors alone appears insufficient to ensure the effective use of resources. Strategic connections with other stakeholder groups become increasingly important—particularly those that operate through different mechanisms and, in some cases, manage significantly larger recovery budgets.

The partnership between Foundations for Ukraine and the development agency Deutsche Gesellschaft für internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), initiated at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Rome in 2025, represents an important first step in this direction. It supports the network in evolving into a partner for larger international actors involved in humanitarian aid and recovery efforts. The ambition is to synergize philanthropic grantmaking with these broader approaches and to establish clearer ways of working together. Advancing this requires continued operational work, including the collection and mapping of data, as well as sustained investment in institutional trust-building.

Looking ahead: coordination in a shifting environment

For those working in coordination roles—at iac Berlin and elsewhere—this adds another complex but important layer to their work. It involves implementation across sectoral contexts and supporting processes that unfold under changing conditions both in Ukraine as well as among its supporters.

Rather than reducing complexity, this form of coordination engages with it. It requires the ability to act under uncertainty, to work with tensions that cannot be easily resolved, and to strengthen the relational connections that enable collective action over time.

If you want to explore engagement opportunities or learn more about this initiative, please get in touch with the network's coordinator (based in Amsterdam):

Monica Stryker
monica.stryker@iac-berlin.org

This article has been taken from our Activity Report 2025.

You can download the entire publication here: