Coping Strategies of the Ukrainian NGO Sector after the 2025 USAID Funding Cut: New Opportunities for EU Democracy Promotion

With the suspension of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) funding in Ukraine in January 2025, many non-government organizations (NGOs) that rely heavily on international aid faced acute risks to their operational stability and organizational survival. These organizations—ranging from independent media outlets and cultural entities to veteran support hubs — play a crucial role in the Ukrainian society, especially as shown by post-Euromaidan contributions (e.g. Shapovalova and Burlyuk, eds. 2018). During the full-scale Russo-Ukrainian war, this role has further intensified, as Ukrainian civil society central to Ukraine’s resilience in many aspects, including defense (Stepanenko and Stewart, 2025). Drawing on the literature on resource dependence, organizational resilience, and sensemaking in times of crisis, this paper examines how Ukrainian NGOs responded to the sudden withdrawal of USAID support as a major disruption to their activities and long-term survival. It sheds light on the coping strategies adopted by these organizations, as well as on the factors that—from their own perspective—either facilitated or hindered their ability to cope. Empirically, the analysis centers on NGOs in five sectors that were funded by USAID at the time of the suspension: Democracy, Human Rights and Governance; Economic Development; Transition and Humanitarian Assistance; Health Care; and Critical Infrastructure. The research is based on semi-structured interviews with 20 NGO representatives conducted in autumn 2025. The findings reveal that the most common coping strategies include reorienting toward alternative foreign donors—most notably the European Union and the United Kingdom—alongside increased reliance on crowdfunding and recourse to domestic state funding. Yet, given the scale and scope of projects previously supported by USAID, additional engagement from other donors is necessary to close the funding gaps that have emerged since January 2025. Although the suspension poses significant challenges for Ukrainian NGOs, it simultaneously creates an opening for European funding instruments to step in and expand their influence in democracy promotion and adjacent fields in Ukraine. Insights into these coping strategies and the potential for partnerships with other donors are therefore essential for understanding how the EU might adjust its democracy promotion instruments to the evolving needs of Ukrainian civil society.