The United States despises a tyrant. This is at the core of why Americans opened their hearts and their wallets when Russia attacked Ukraine.
To provide humanitarian support, individuals, corporations and foundations have generously donated — for example, an estimated 25% of all Americans have made a donation to a charity tied to Ukraine. That’s in addition to the almost $77 billion in assistance the federal government has sent Ukraine since the start of the war.
But the job is not done, not by a long shot. Although the Ukrainians have launched a major offensive, the Russians have retaliated by cutting off exports of the country’s grain, an important source of revenue for the government and critical food for the world’s hungry. Refugees are still overwhelming Ukraine’s meager relief resources, casualties mount with every new missile attack and the country’s civilian infrastructure is under immense stress. And looming in the background is the overwhelming need for funds to rebuild apartments, schools, hospitals and factories destroyed during the war — a total estimated by the World Bank at an immense $411 billion.
The most urgent task is maintaining the flow of funds, both from governmental agencies and private sources. Politics will determine the future of federal programs, but sustaining and, if possible, accelerating the flow of private funds is the urgent task of hundreds of nongovernmental agencies that raise, administer and convey donations for medical supplies, food, infrastructure and humanitarian support to Ukrainians.
The vast majority of NGOs focused on Ukraine relief were founded and are headquartered outside the country, but Ukrainian organizations also exist. Unfortunately, in the past, a few Ukrainian NGOs have fallen victim to corruption, a situation that was often imputed to the entire nonprofit sector. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, however, has initiated a number of measures to address this situation and has fired and prosecuted officials involved in illegal activities. Nevertheless, international perceptions of NGO corruption remain and threaten to diminish the generosity of donors whose dollars are urgently needed as we approach the reconstruction phase.
To root out corrupt organizations and to reassure the public that their gifts are being used effectively and efficiently, NGOs working in Ukraine should agree to a common code of conduct enforced by third-party monitoring and independent of any Ukrainian governmental authorities.
Some effective models exist — foremost is that of Rise Ukraine, a coalition of 40 international and Ukrainian organizations promoting integrity and accountability in the reconstruction process. The organization endorses ensuring transparency and accountability; promoting competition and efficiency; publishing and using open data; furthering reforms required for European Union membership; and encouraging zero tolerance for corruption. While membership in Rise Ukraine is optional, it provides a paradigm for third-party monitoring, as do organizations such as Charity Navigator and Candid.
Funding to create such an organization should be supported first by the governmental donor community, followed by a dues fee structure for members that creates sustainability and buy-in. All parties need to be involved substantially and financially to have skin in the game and a feeling of ownership. This, of course, is easier said than done, but given the many conferences on the topic of Ukraine, making this a deliverable seems to be an easy first step.
It is critical to establish such monitoring organizations before large-scale reconstruction programs are launched in Ukraine, even as combat continues.
Another third-party monitoring success story comes from Haiti, where the 2010 earthquake led to an immediate infusion of aid funneled to NGOs. Many of these organizations were corrupt and unaccountable, but Hope for Haiti offers a notable exception. Focused on improving health, education and economic opportunity, the NGO is audited every year, files a Form 990 with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, releases an annual report and is evaluated by Charity Navigator and Candid, from which it receives the highest ratings. More important, all of these measures ensure that donor funds reach those who in need.
In addition, while third-party monitoring will expose fraudulent and inefficient charities, it will not necessarily address such problems as duplication of effort or the shipment of expired medical or humanitarian supplies — problems that reduce NGO effectiveness. To deal with these issues, the Ukrainian government should establish an online clearinghouse that would provide real-time updates on which materials are needed, the locations, and what quantity and quality are required.
Ukraine’s needs — immediate and reconstructive — are great, and it will take a multidecade, multinational effort to reestablish the nation’s economic and political viability. Critical to that effort will be maintaining the confidence of donors that can only be sustained by the implementation of a third-party monitoring system, as well as a clearinghouse to promote NGO efficiency and effectiveness.
Now is the time to take these key steps for the future of Ukraine, whose needs are so great.
Brock Bierman is CEO of Ukraine Focus
More Top Picks Dehumidifiers
and a former assistant administrator for the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Bureau for Europe and Eurasia. Daniel Runde is senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. John Hewko is general secretary and CEO of Rotary International and the Rotary Foundation.Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].