In summer 2017, Ukrainian women’s/feminist organizations were invited to take part in the assessment of movement capacity. The self-assessment was carried out using a capacity assessment tool developed and kindly provided by the Global Fund for Women. After completing online forms, we held roundtables in four regional clusters to discuss the results.

1. MEASURING THE CAPACITY OF
WOMEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENTS
Lessons learned from the pilot experience

2. About this tool
The Movement Capacity Assessment Tool is designed to engage stakeholders to assess the
strengths and needs of the movement they are part of and use the results to inform planning
and action. This tool can be used as a planning tool and a measurement tool to track progress
over a period of time.
Building on research on social movements, the Movement Capacity Assessment Tool includes
a series of questions to capture
1. Respondents’ perception of the movement they are part of along seven dimensions
2. Respondents’ perception of the developmental stage of the movement
3. Gains and/or setbacks of the movement in the past year
4. Background information about the respondents, including their age group, affiliation, and
role(s) in the movement

3. About this Assessment
Ukraine (national)
Selected movement: Ukrainian Women’s Movement
Date of assessment: June 2017 – September 2017
Invited participants: 192 organizations and individuals across Ukraine
Number of respondents:
115 sets of respondents:
• 215 individuals representing 77 organizations
• 38 responses from individual activists/experts
Regions:
Representing four regions in Ukraine:
• 22 from Eastern Ukraine
• 26 from Central and Northern Ukraine
• 23 from Western Ukraine
• 20 from Southern Ukraine
Incorporating voices from new
generations:
An additional 24 young women activists were included as a final
cohort in the national data results

4. Characteristics of Respondents
115 Respondents
Organization or
group; 77
Individual
activist or
expert; 38
Type of Respondent
Ukraine (national)
Type of Organization #
Grassroots or community based organization 49
Regional domestic network or coalition 8
National network or coalition 8
National non-profit organization, research center
or agency
6
Local network or coalition 1
Regional network or coalition 1
International non-profit organization, research
center or agency
1
International network or coalition 1
Donor 1

5. Characteristics of Respondents
3%
3%
5%
14%
15%
17%
17%
18%
20%
73%
Fundraising/managing resources
Support infrastructure
Coalition building
Leadership development
Capacity building for others
Policy advocacy
Service delivery
Mobilizing and organizing
Strategic support
Conscious raising and awareness building
Role in the movement
Ukraine (national)

6. Characteristics of Respondents
264 individuals*
35 or
younger
38%Over 35
years
62%
Age of participants
35%
31%
34%
4 years or less 5-9 years 10 years or
more
Years of participation in the
movement
*Of the 264 individuals 12 did not provide age or years in the movement

7. • Women’s movement in Ukraine
• Feminist movement in Ukraine
• Human rights movement in Ukraine
• Movement for gender equality
• Movement of women with disabilities
in Ukraine
• LGBT movement
• Anti-discrimination movement
• Regional-specific women’s
movements
Identified Movements of Respondents

8. Results: Perception of the Stage of the
Movement
49%
35%
7%
10%
Emerging Coalescing Mature Stagnant or in
decline
% of Respondents
Ukraine (national)

9. Results: Perception of the Stage of the
Movement, by Region41% 41%
9% 9%
Emerging Coalescing Mature Stagnant or in
decline
Eastern
Ukraine (national)
54%
15%
8%
23%
Emerging Coalescing Mature Stagnant or in
decline
Central and Northern
65%
30%
4% 0%
Emerging Coalescing Mature Stagnant or in
decline
Western
40%
50%
5% 5%
Emerging Coalescing Mature Stagnant or in
decline
Southern

10. Results: Perceptions of Strengths,
Challenges, and Priorities
Average Score
(lowest=1; highest=5) % of respondents
Priority
% of respondents
(1) Grassroots base 3.35 24%
(2) Leadership 3.51 8%
(3) Collaboration 3.27 43%
(4) Shared political agenda 3.44 27%
(5) Use of multiple strategies 3.67 18%
(6) Support infrastructure 3.32 51%
(7) Safety and security 2.85 22%
Ukraine (national)
-47%
-51%
-46%
-39%
-48%
-17%
-37%
37%
43%
42%
45%
50%
79%
58%
% Challenge % Strength

11. 2,00
2,25
2,50
2,75
3,00
3,25
3,50
3,75
4,00
4,25
Grassroots base
Leadership pipeline
Collaboration
Shared political agendaMutually reinforcing strategies
Support infrastructure
Safety & security of WHRD
Eastern
Central & Northern
Western
Southern
National
Results: Average Scores for Each Dimension by
Region

12. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Grassroots base
Leadership pipeline
Collaboration
Shared political agendaMutually reinforcing strategies
Support infrastructure
Safety & security of WHRD
Eastern
Central & Northern
Western
Southern
National
Results: Priority
Dimensions by Region

13. 2,00
2,25
2,50
2,75
3,00
3,25
3,50
3,75
4,00
4,25
Grassroots base
Leadership pipeline
Collaboration
Shared political agendaMutually reinforcing strategies
Support infrastructure
Safety & security of WHRD
35 and Under
Over 35
Mixed age
National
Results: Average
Scores for Each
Dimension by Age of
Respondent

14. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Grassroots base
Leadership pipeline
Collaboration
Shared political agendaMutually reinforcing strategies
Support infrastructure
Safety & security of WHRD
35 and under
Over 35 years
Mixed age
National
Results: Priority
Dimensions by Age of
Respondent

15. Detailed Results

16. Item Level Results
This section provides detailed results for each item, based on respondents’
rating of each statement. For analysis purpose, we grouped the responses into
three categories:
―Strength: % of participants responded “quite a bit” or “very much”
―Challenge: % of participants responded “not at all” “a little” or
“somewhat”
―I don’t know: % of participants responded “I don’t know”

17. 1. Strong, sustained, and diverse
grassroots base
79%
74%
49%
50%
70%
37%
34%
19%
26%
50%
49%
30%
63%
65%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1.7 The power of the movement is recognized by elected officials.
1.6 The power of the movement is recognized by the media.
1.5 Individuals who are most affected by the issue speak for themselves,
lead others in the community, and have ownership of the change…
1.4 There are a variety of opportunities for individuals to participate in
the movement.
1.3 There is a critical mass of individuals willing and ready to take action
to support the movement.
1.2 The movement’s membership represents populations most affected
by the issue.
1.1 Participants in the movement represent diverse populations.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
Challeng
e
Strength I don’t
know

18. 2. Diverse leadership that includes next
generation leaders
44%
63%
37%
35%
47%
60%
54%
35%
63%
65%
50%
38%
2%
2%
3%
2%
2.6 The movement shows openness to the needs and new demands of youth and
integrates them into their agendas.
2.5 There are clear mechanism(s) to develop and support new leaders, including next
generation leaders and leaders from communities that are most affected by the issue.
2.4 Leaders from different generations exchange ideas, skills and/or knowledge, and
collaborate.
2.3 The movement is self-led, meaning that the leadership represents people they
serve (for example, women with disabilities organizing and supporting other women
with disabilities or trans* people making decisions about trans people’s rights).
2.2 The contribution of young leaders in the movement is recognized by members.
2.1 There is a large cadre of young leaders active in the movement.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
Challenge Strength I don’t
know

19. 43%
60%
71%
58%
58%
53%
39%
27%
41%
38%
3%
1%
2%
1%
3%
3.5 There is sufficient opportunity for different and overlapping
movements to learn from each other and collaborate.
3.4 Groups within this movement are actively participating in key spaces
on social justice and human rights issues.
3.3 There is strong engagement and support from other allied movements.
3.2 Groups within this movement are actively reaching out and engaging
informal groups such as women’s collectives, self-help groups, student
groups, etc.
3.1 There is strong collaboration among groups within this movement.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
3. Strong collaboration within this movement
and with other allied movements
Challenge Strength I don’t
know

20. 37%
61%
45%
50%
53%
44%
41%
43%
60%
30%
52%
49%
45%
52%
57%
54%
3%
9%
3%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
4.8 The agenda is driven by the priorities of key affected communities.
4.7 The agenda of the movement is not influenced by outside actors (NGOs,
government, donors, etc.).
4.6 The movement is effective in (re)framing and communicating issues within and
beyond the movement.
4.5 When opportunities arise, members of the movement respond quickly in a
coordinated way.
4.4 There is a shared understanding of potential solutions to the problems.
4.3 There is a shared understanding of problems.
4.2 The movement has a set of clear short-term political priorities.
4.1 The movement has clear long-term goals and vision.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
4. Shared collective political agenda
Challenge Strength I don’t
know

21. 5. Use of multiple strategies that are
mutually reinforcing
45%
48%
41%
28%
55%
50%
59%
72%
2%
5.4 The movement is effective in using appropriate technology and media
to communicate with different audiences.
5.3 There is a coordinated effort to generate evidence to inform strategy
development.
5.2 Individuals and groups using different strategies support the
movement's agenda in a coordinated way.
5.1 Individuals and groups are using diverse strategies to advance the
movement's agenda. Strategies might include grassroots mobilizing,
service delivery, public awareness building, policy analysis, advocacy,
lobbying, litigation, research, etc.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
Challenge Strength I don’t
know

22. 6. Strong support infrastructure
43%
59%
55%
57%
48%
59%
55%
34%
43%
39%
49%
40%
3%
7%
3%
3%
3%
1%
6.6 There are opportunities for movement actors to discuss successes and challenges
in an open and honest way.
6.5 There is a mechanism for effective decision-making for the movement.
6.4 There are recognized organizations or coalitions that are effective in raising,
managing, and distributing funds and other resources for the movement.
6.3 There are recognized organizations or coalitions that provide appropriate capacity
building support to smaller organizations when needed.
6.2 There are recognized organizations or coalitions that coordinate and communicate
with members of the movement effectively.
6.1 There are sufficient opportunities for groups to come together for peer learning and
joint planning.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
Challenge Strength I don’t
know

23. 66%
70%
69%
61%
27%
22%
26%
36%
7%
9%
5%
3%
7.4 The group or network I am a part of has security plans and strategies that include
measures for self-care.
7.3 The group or network I am a part of has plans and strategies to ensure digital
security.
7.2 The group or network I am a part of has plans and strategies to ensure physical
safety of its members (includes public spaces/events, office spaces, and their homes).
7.1 There are informal and formal networks that can provide appropriate and
immediate response to address violence against human rights defenders.
1 2 3 4 5 0
Ukraine (national)
7. Strong collective capacities to ensure
safety and security of human rights defenders
Challenge Strength I don’t
know

24. Top 10 Strengths
1. (Use of multiple strategies 5.1) Individuals and
groups are using diverse strategies to advance the
movement's agenda.
2. (Grassroots base 1.2) The movement’s membership
represents populations most affected by the issue.
3. (Leadership 2.4) Leaders from different generations
exchange ideas, skills and/or knowledge, and
collaborate.
4. (Grassroots base 1.1) Participants in the movement
represent diverse populations.
5. (Leadership 2.3) The movement is self-led, leadership
represents people they serve
6. (Use of multiple strategies 5.2) Individuals and groups
using different strategies support the movement's
agenda in a coordinated way.
7. (Use of multiple strategies 5.4) The movement is
effective in using appropriate technology and media to
communicate with different audiences.
8. (Shared political agenda 4.3) There is a shared
understanding of problems.
9. (Shared political agenda 4.8) The agenda is driven by
the priorities of key affected communities.
10. (Shared political agenda 4.2) The movement has a set of
clear short-term political priorities.

25. Additional Strengths by Region
Elements from the region’s top 10 strengths that do not appear in the national top 10
Central & Northern Eastern Southern Western
Support Infrastructure 6.6 There are
opportunities for movement actors to
discuss successes and challenges in
an open and honest way.
Shared political agenda 4.1 The
movement has clear long-term goals
and vision.
Grassroots base 1.5 Individuals
who are most affected by the issue
speak for themselves, lead others
in the community, and have
ownership of the change process.
Leadership 2.2 The contribution of
young leaders in the movement is
recognized by members.
Shared political agenda 4.8 The
agenda is driven by the priorities
of key affected communities.
Shared political agenda 4.1 The
movement has clear long-term
goals and vision.
Support infrastructure 6.6 There
are opportunities for movement
actors to discuss successes and
challenges in an open and honest
way.
Shared political agenda 4.4 There
is a shared understanding of
potential solutions to the
problems.
Support infrastructure 6.2 There
are recognized organizations or
coalitions that coordinate and
communicate with members of
the movement effectively.
Grassroots base 1.5 Individuals
who are most affected by the issue
speak for themselves, lead others
in the community, and have
ownership of the change process.
Use of multiple strategies 5.3
There is a coordinated effort to
generate evidence to inform
strategy development.

26. Top 10 Challenges
1. (Safety & security 7.3) The group or network I am
a part of has plans and strategies to ensure
digital security.
2. (Safety & security 7.2) The group or network I am
a part of has plans and strategies to ensure
physical safety of its members
3. (Safety & security 7.4) The group or network I am
a part of has security plans and strategies that
include measures for self-care.
4. (Support infrastructure 6.5) There is a
mechanism for effective decision-making for the
movement.
5. (Shared political agenda 4.7) The agenda of the
movement is not influenced by outside actors
(NGOs, government, donors, etc.)
6. (Grassroots base 1.7) The power of the movement is
recognized by elected officials.
7. (Collaboration 3.3) There is strong engagement and
support from other allied movements.
8. (Leadership 2.5) There are clear mechanism(s) to
develop and support new leaders
9. (Grassroots base 1.6) The power of the movement is
recognized by the media.
10. (Grassroots base 1.3) There is a critical mass of
individuals willing and ready to take action to
support the movement.

27. Additional Challenges by Region
Elements from the region’s top 10 challenges that do not appear in the national top 10
Central & Northern Eastern Southern Western
Support Infrastructure 6.3 There are
recognized organizations or
coalitions that provide appropriate
capacity building support to smaller
organizations when needed.
Support infrastructure 6.2 There
are recognized organizations or
coalitions that coordinate and
communicate with members of
the movement effectively.
Support infrastructure 6.1 There
are sufficient opportunities for
groups to come together for peer
learning and joint planning.
Support infrastructure 6.3 There
are recognized organizations or
coalitions that provide appropriate
capacity building support to
smaller organizations when
needed.
Leadership 2.1 There is a large
cadre of young leaders active in
the movement.
Grassroots base 1.5 Individuals
who are most affected by the issue
speak for themselves, lead others
in the community, and have
ownership of the change process.
Support infrastructure 6.1 There
are sufficient opportunities for
groups to come together for peer
learning and joint planning.
Safety & security 7.1 There are
informal and formal networks that
can provide appropriate and
immediate response to address
violence against human rights
defenders.
Shared political agenda 4.1 The
movement has clear long-term
goals and vision.
Leadership 2.5 There are clear
mechanism(s) to develop and
support new leaders, including
next generation leaders and
leaders from communities that are
most affected by the issue.

28. Considerations for
Next Steps

29. Considerations for Next Steps
Based on the results, this section provides some considerations for
next steps. These are meant to serve as the starting point for
conversation.

30. Average Score
(lowest=1; highest=5) % of respondents
Priority
% of respondents
(1) Grassroots base 3.35 24%
(2) Leadership 3.51 8%
(3) Collaboration 3.27 43%
(4) Shared political agenda 3.44 27%
(5) Use of multiple strategies 3.67 18%
(6) Support infrastructure 3.32 51%
(7) Safety and security 2.85 22%
Ukraine (national)
-47%
-51%
-46%
-39%
-48%
-17%
-37%
37%
43%
42%
45%
50%
79%
58%
% Challenge % Strength
Areas to Strength
Collaboration and Support Infrastructure

31. Strengths Challenges
• 6.2 There are recognized
organizations or coalitions that
coordinate and communicate with
members of the movement
effectively.
• 6.6 There are opportunities for
movement actors to discuss
successes and challenges in an open
and honest way.
• 6.1 There are sufficient opportunities for groups to come
together for peer learning and joint planning.
• 6.3 There are recognized organizations or coalitions that
provide appropriate capacity building support to smaller
organizations when needed.
• 6.4 There are recognized organizations or coalitions that
are effective in raising, managing, and distributing funds
and other resources for the movement.
• 6.5 There is a mechanism for effective decision-making for
the movement.
Priority 1: Strengthen Support
Infrastructure

32. Priority 2: Strengthen Collaboration
Strengths Challenges
• 3.5 There is sufficient
opportunity for different
and overlapping
movements to learn from
each other and collaborate.
• 3.1 There is strong collaboration among groups within this movement.
• 3.2 Groups within this movement are actively reaching out and
engaging informal groups (i.e., groups that are not legally constituted
OR groups that has little or no formal structure) such as women’s
collectives, self-help groups, student groups, etc.
• 3.3 There is strong engagement and support from other allied
movements.
• 3.4 Groups within this movement are actively participating in key
spaces on social justice and human rights issues.

33. Regional Discussions

34. About the Regional Discussions
• Participants from the assessment were invited to attend a regional roundtable discussion to
discuss the results and initiate conversation about next steps
―Eastern: Lviv, 29 June 2017
―Southern: Odessa, 5 July 2017
―Eastern, Dnipro, 22 August 2017
―Central & Norther, Kyiv, 23 August 2017
• During the discussion, in small groups, participants discussed two questions: did the results
resonate? And what are the next steps?

35. Discussion Questions
1. Regarding the findings on the most challenging areas and top priorities to strengthen:
― Do they resonate with you?
― Is there anything that surprised you?
― Would you prioritize other areas to strengthen? If so, which area(s)?
2. To strengthen the priority areas you have identified:
― Do you agree with the identified areas?
― What do you think the next steps should be?
― What resources do you need? What resources do you already have?

36. Selected data from the regional discussions
Participants found surprising:
• Evaluation of the stage of development of the movement
• Majority of respondents consider “Leadership” one of the strongest dimensions
of the Ukrainian women’s movement
• Only few organizations consider themselves “feminist organizations”
Other priority areas to strengthen:
• Shared collective political agenda
Important strategies to consider for the next steps:
• Engage youth
• Form informal coalitions to address certain issues/challenges, do not aim at
unifying everybody in one coalition
• More information about organizations is needed (both within the movement and
for outside audiences)
• Platforms for follow-up discussions on each of the 7 dimensions should be
created

37. Next steps for Ukrainian Women’s Fund
• Use findings from the results and discussions to inform strategic planning
• Plan to form working groups to explore the strengths and challenges of specific
elements (dimensions) further
• Engage donors in conversations about priorities for support women’s movements in
Ukraine
• Share the results of the assessment with women’s NGOs, so that they can use the
data in their work at the local, regional and national level
• Encourage follow-up conversations with diverse audiences and at different levels

38. Thank you
Ukrainian Women’s Fund
uwf@uwf.org.ua
www.uwf.org.ua