Authors:

Olena Podobied-Frankivska — RPR Coalition expert, Executive Director of the National Ukrainian Youth Association, Head of the Supervisory Board of Associations of Youth Centers of Ukraine;

Ihor Zhdanov — Head of the Information Defense Project in the "Open Politics" Foundation, Minister of Youth and Sports of Ukraine (2014-2019) (1st stage);

Olena Medvedenko — Co-founder of the NGO "U.Sport", member of the The Presidential Foundation for Support of Education, Science and Sports;

Yuriy Yuzych — RPR Coalition expert, Head of the Board of The Plast National Scout Organization of Ukraine;

Yuriy Svyrydov — Founder of NGO "U.Sport", FC Shakhtar Director for Strategic Development and Communications (2nd stage);

Leonid Sitchenko — Member of the Board of NGO "Foundation of Regional Initiatives" (2nd stage);

Stepan Zolotar — Head of the Department for Deoccupation and Reintegration of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (ARC) of the Office of the Representative of the President of Ukraine in the ARC.

Group manager:

Margaryta Khvostova — RPR Coalition advocacy manager; manager of the working group

1. 1. STATE OF AFFAIRS IN THE FIELD OF YOUTH AND SPORTS POLICY AS OF EARLY 2023, INCLUDING MEASUREMENT INDICATORS  

In developed democracies, the main priorities of youth and sports policy are the broad involvement of young people in public life. This is accomplished through participation in sports and youth organizations, inclusion in decision-making processes, decentralization of governance through the support and organizational development of sports and youth institutions, project funding, and as a result, a systematic reduction in the percentage of the physically and socially inactive population. 

In its strategic documents and government programs, Ukraine declares the importance of building a healthy nation and actively engaging young people. At the same time, most of the state and local budgets continue to be allocated towards attaining the goals of high-performance sports, as well as towards funding selected unsystematic activities. 

The Strategy for the Development of Physical Culture and Sports for the period up to 2028, approved by the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 1089 of November 4, 2020, states that in 2019, the number of people involved in physical education and sports activities amounted to 14.7% of the total population of the country, while in Europe the average figure is 40%. However, in Ukraine, there is no systematic, high-quality monitoring of the level of physical activity of the population, which makes it almost impossible to obtain updated data. Meanwhile, according to the Representative Sociological Survey “The State of Youth in Ukraine 2021”, only 3.6% of all respondents are members of any public organization, 4.4% “sometimes take an active part” in student and pupil self-government activities, and 2.9% - in youth councils, in contrast to the European average of over 40%.

Quantitative indicators of the state of physical culture and sports, which are listed in the “Sport of Ukraine” handbook, are also quite disheartening: as of 2021, 434,268 children were involved in 1239 children’s and youth sports schools, and 3949 reserve athletes were enrolled in 34 schools of high sportsmanship, with 1730 athletes and coaches employed by national teams. It is worth noting that state statistics do not take into account the engagement of private sports clubs and fitness clubs.

In addition to children’s and youth sports schools, a number of institutions exist that declare working with young people but are managed by other ministries, in particular, as of 2022, 1246 out-of-school education institutions under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education and Science account for 980,789 people, i.e. about a million children and youth. This does not correlate with the coverage of children’s and youth sports schools, as given the nearly equal number of institutions within the children’s and youth sports schools and out-of-school education structures, the coverage should be comparable or close, but not twice as high (452,000 athletes versus about a million children and youth, respectively).

Youth work is also carried out by cultural institutions subordinated to the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy. The number of readers across 42 libraries or their branches for young people totals 382,800. Since, according to generalized data from various sources, and taking into account the maximum estimate, one institution sometimes submits reports to different ministries concurrently, we assume that the actual quantitative coverage is even lower.  It is not uncommon for the founder (in most cases, state or local authorities) to determine the functions of institutions or agencies without taking into account the needs of users and involving them in the process.

These institutions are the backbone of Ukraine’s sports and youth work system, but they often remain overregulated and bureaucratized, and therefore not effective enough. At the same time, the state and local authorities largely channel budget funding to these institutions, often ignoring the promotion of organizational development of democratic institutions such as public sports clubs, youth organizations, and unions. 

Inherited from the totalitarian system, we have over 90,000 sports facilities that usually perform a mono-function, are morally obsolete, and require either modern reconstruction or complete demolition. Since 2016, the Ukrainian state has begun to invest in the construction of new and reconstruction of old sports and youth facilities, but still lacks a concept for infrastructure development. As a result, facilities are being built chaotically, often without calculating their cost-effectiveness or researching the needs of residents, including young people. 

A direct conflict arises when the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Ukraine simultaneously shapes state policy in the domain of youth and sports and administers funds for its implementation through its own state institutions. In addition, the lack of a systematic independent evaluation, prognostication, and analysis of managerial decisions is a problem for the entire public administration system. Unreformed per the Strategy for Reforming Public Administration of Ukraine, approved by the Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 474 of June 24, 2016 (as amended by the Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 1102-p of December 18, 2018), the Ministry is not a functional center for public policy design, as it must divert its attention to a large number of administrative requests and control over the distribution of funding. This, in turn, harms the quality of development and formation of cross-sectoral state policy in the area of youth and sports, causing its fragmentation. Thus, the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Ukraine fragmentedly performs the functions of formulating state policy in the domain of youth and sports, as well as data collection, prognostication, and analytics, while lacking a comprehensive understanding of the development in all these areas.  

In 2015, a functional audit of the Ministry of Youth and Sports was conducted, and a state experiment was introduced to promote the autonomy and independence of national sports federations, including by changing the order and procedure for their funding and increasing their responsibility for the development of the respective sport. 

Since 2016, there has also been a significant increase in funding for high-performance sports and partly for the youth program, but this has failed to qualitatively impact the democratization of the sector and increase the number of Ukrainians involved in regular physical activity or youth initiatives. In 2019, there was an attempt to reinvent the role of sports within the state, but the reform was suspended in 2020.

Prior to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation, the following visionary and strategic documents were in place in the field of sports and youth policy:

Strategy for the Development of Physical Culture and Sports until 2028;

National Youth Strategy until 2030; 

The Concept for the Development of Daily Sports in Educational Institutions;

The Concept for the Development of Civic Education; the State Program for the Development of Physical Culture and Sports has been in place since 2017; 

The State Targeted Social Program “Youth of Ukraine” approved in 2021;

and the State Targeted Social Program of National and Patriotic Education for the period up to 2025.

To a large extent, they ensure the operation of old institutions and policy vectors, and their implementation has now been suspended. The Presidential Foundation for the Support of Education, Science and Sports, created by the President of Ukraine, has not succeeded in revitalizing the sector due to its unsystematic approach.  

The Law of Ukraine On Physical Culture and Sports No. 3808-XII of December 24, 1993, defines the basic principles of the sports management system, however, it follows the Soviet model of management. Since Ukraine’s independence, the law has been amended 25 times. It was rewritten and increased by 50% in size, but the core theses and norms remained unchanged. 

The Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy No. 1414-IX of April 27, 2021, was adopted, according to some experts, without the actual involvement of youth policy stakeholders, resulting in some norms being reduced to the post-Soviet model, which primarily focuses on regulating youth initiatives.  At the same time, the progressive and democratic norms of the new law are not being implemented in any way, the Ukrainian Youth Foundation has not been created, and the managerial and strategic functions of the Ministry of Youth and Sports are not separated.  

The Law of Ukraine On Anti-Doping Measures in Sports No. 2011-IX of January 26, 2022, which, although adopted in early 2022, still does not take into account all the recommendations made by the Council of Europe experts, and needs further improvement. The Law of Ukraine On Extracurricular Education barely incorporates civic education. The Law of Ukraine On Children’s Health and Recreation No. 1841-III of June 22, 2000, supports and continues the practice of Soviet pioneer camps, mainly for socially disadvantaged children, and in no way transforms them into educational camps for everyone, regardless of social status (today, the children “follow the money”, rather than the money following the children). The Law of Ukraine On Volunteering  No. 3236-VI of April 19, 2011, permits volunteering but does not create opportunities to support and deploy volunteer labor. 

The war has significantly exacerbated the crisis, the solution to which will depend on the consolidation of society and a reconsideration of the place of sport in the life of every Ukrainian, the participation of young people (including those in emigration), and the role of the state in this. 

According to the Government portal, more than 2 million young people have become internally displaced and about 2 million more have moved abroad. 53% of Ukrainians are currently unemployed, 60% of whom are young people under 35. As of April 3, 2022, only 30% of youth centers and spaces out of the pre-war total were operating, 8 youth centers were destroyed, damaged, or occupied; 68% of youth workers were forced to leave their regions; only 37.6% have the opportunity to carry out youth work. 3,100 educational institutions and 320 sports facilities, which are the basis for the mass involvement of children in sports, have been destroyed or damaged, and almost 100 sports facilities have been severely damaged.  

According to various studies, approximately 60% of community-based organizations resumed their activities, but many of them changed their focus to humanitarian aid. Some of them have not yet reverted to their main statutory activities. Another challenge stems from the fact that a large number of community activists were mobilized, resulting in a decrease in membership. This was further complicated by the problem of team members relocating to different cities and, as a result, the loss of team communications. Finally, while providing humanitarian aid, many organizations were unable to submit new applications to seek funding from foreign donors, and the few existing state or local project competitions were not held.

In some regions, the system of sports and youth work is actually in a state of suspension, while in others it is partially operational, but individual initiatives and sports clubs continue to actively encourage sports participation and training, as well as generate funds through online events and charity events abroad. 

Ukraine’s accession to the Council of Europe’s Enhanced Partial Agreement on Sport (EPAS) obliges the introduction of a number of democratic changes. Such an approach will significantly expand the usual perception of sport in Ukraine, making it no longer only accessible to the elite, but rather a tool for attaining the public good. Although the revised European Charter on the Participation of Young People in Local and Regional Life is generally integrated into the Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy No. 1414-IX of April 27, 2021, at the final stage of the adoption of the law, youth participation was essentially turned into “government-controlled participation”, which nullifies the very idea of including young people in real decision-making, rather than just approving decisions already made (youth participation is about the process, not the result).

The core documents that should serve as the basis for proposals for the country’s recovery in the field of sports and youth are those that laid down fundamental changes for Ukraine’s European integration and policy-making in the post-war period:

•  White Paper on Sport 2007 and Action Plan

•  Treaty of Lisbon, Article 165 (1,2)

• European Sports Charter (Revised in 2021 under Ukraine's involvement)

•  Developing the European Dimension in Sport, 2011 (The European Commission)

•  EU Work Plan for Sport (2021-2024)

•  A new impetus for European youth European Commission White Paper 

• Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth

• EU youth strategy (2019–2027)

• Youth Action Plan (YAP) in EU external action 2022 2027 Promoting meaningful youth participation and empowerment in EU external action for sustainable development, equality and peace  

• Final Declaration of the 3 rd declaration European Youth Work Convention

The National Program “Development of Culture and Sports System” of the National Recovery Plan of Ukraine envisages the implementation of 3 strategic goals and 6 sports-related projects that are not adapted to wartime conditions and have been implemented by the Ministry of Youth and Sports in previous years. Three of them are infrastructural and involve the construction of facilities for high-performance sports, as well as an awareness campaign to promote physical activity, the implementation of the project “Active Parks – Locations of a Healthy Nation” and the launch of a “club system” of funding for grassroots sports. However, it is difficult to assess the potential success of these strategic goals under the current system, which does not provide sufficient mechanisms for their implementation. 

It also includes 25 projects in the field of youth policy designed to achieve 2 goals, which focus on acquiring skills that will enable young people to be more actively involved in public life, yet there are no specific projects to support those who are supposed to be implementing projects to achieve these goals – neither community organizations working with youth nor youth centers. Presumably, this support is supposed to be provided by the Ukrainian Youth Foundation, however, upon reviewing the regulations of the Foundation, it becomes clear that they are intended to support projects, not institutional development, and as a result, ultimately no one in the public sector will be able to implement these projects aimed at gaining knowledge and skills.

2. VISION OF THE STATE OF THE MEDIA FIELD IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF 2030, INCLUDING MEASUREMENT INDICATORS 

2.1 Vision of youth policy 

Youth policy should be separated from sport and elevated to a governmental cross-sectoral level, for example, through the appointment of a government commissioner or a minister who would not head a ministry. At the same time, the approach should be changed from funding youth within only one specialized ministry to providing resource support for youth and youth work in all sectors. After all, young people are unique in that their interests should be reflected in every ministry. Therefore, cross-sectoral and inter-sectoral cooperation is needed to create and finance programs for youth in each of the ministries, and to create public-private partnerships (until now, the restrictions set by the Budget Code of Ukraine have been a major argument against this approach).

Instead, it is extremely important to separate the functions of formulating and implementing state policy among different institutions, which would enable deeper cooperation with civil society, introduce transparent competitive support for grassroots initiatives (not only competitions and events, but above all the support for institutional development of civil society and youth work components), and delegate the functions of sports and youth work development to democratic institutions.

In the process of implementing youth policy, the criterion of youth diversity is also taken into account - the interests and needs of young women and men, of different age groups, of different states of health, etc. Since young people are not a homogeneous social category, the needs and interests of various subgroups of young people should be taken into account.

The entire policy is designed to organize high-quality youth policy in communities, as well as to create appropriate conditions for youth work for maximum self-fulfillment of the majority of young people in communities. In practice, this means that there are no youth departments or specialists in the executive bodies of communities (i.e., there is no actual compartmentalization of youth policy and youth work based on the specific branch of the local government structure it is assigned to).

In 2030, in each community, youth policy is developed and coordinated by a youth council, and institutionalized by the relevant local council (not by the mayor, starosta, or executive committee, but by a council). Youth councils are enshrined in community statutes and are the main advisory bodies for local governments in terms of developing and transforming youth policy.  At the national and regional levels, there are regular staff training and support programs for youth councils, including school and student self-government bodies.

The implementer of youth policy at the community level is the municipal youth center, a non-profit institution that also develops a network of youth spaces (in schools, libraries, out-of-school institutions, sports and music schools, and even on private property or on the basis of state/community/religious organizations recognized by the state), covering more than 50% of the community’s youth every month. A youth center is not only a safe space for young people, especially adolescents, with free access to heat, light, and the Internet. It is also suitable for organizing and implementing volunteer projects in the community; centers and spaces also serve to support the development of branches of all-Ukrainian youth networks of community organizations, as well as act as information hubs on opportunities for young people in the community, regional, national, and EU levels.

Each municipal youth center has a public and transparent supervisory board, which is formed on a 50-50 basis (half of the representatives are elected by the youth council and the other half - by the local self-government body of the community). The supervisory board is enshrined in the charters of youth centers with the authority to determine and support the strategy for the development of youth work within the community, control the work of the youth center and community spaces, control the financial management of the center, as well as with the right to nominate a candidate for the position of director of the center to the local self-government body and the right to recall them from their position. Thus, the Supervisory Board of the municipal youth center becomes the main collegial body for the practical alignment and promotion of youth policy at the community level, implementing the relevant approach of the Council of Europe. 

Youth initiatives and projects benefit from a simplified procedure for receiving financial support from the community, region, and state. This includes hosting volunteer groups in the community and educational visits to other communities in the region, other regions of Ukraine, and abroad (primarily to the EU, the US, and Canada). At least 30% of community youth have experience in cooperation with youth from other regions and countries, understand the benefits of developing their own community, and are integrated into the process of making key decisions in their community. Community youth also have the opportunity to influence decision-making regarding youth at the regional, national, and international levels.

Youth work in the community, which covers the majority of youth (more than 50% of youth aged 12-24), is carried out by qualified youth leaders and workers who have not only received appropriate training but are constantly working to improve the quality of their educational work, which is actively encouraged by the state and communities. Each community has at least two educational units of Plast - Ukrainian Scouting (as part of the state strategy to support the Plast movement), as well as several other branches of national youth organizations that help to build national and civic unity among Ukrainian youth.

School and student self-governance bodies gained real influence over key decisions in their educational institutions, with their voice becoming crucial for decision-making that directly or indirectly affects schoolchildren and students, respectively. Self-government bodies receive at least 5% of the total budget of their educational institutions and organize the public distribution of these resources to support youth initiatives within their institutions (including institutional support for student organizations).

All-Ukrainian and local youth organizations have the opportunity to receive essential resources (premises, organizational and institutional support for staff teams; funds for project activities with 10-20% provided for the administrative support of these projects) for institutional formation and development at the national and the community level respectively. Their mission is to reach the majority of young people in their communities on a monthly basis through their combined activities. Such organizations are transparent and public to society and communities regarding all the resources they use, and undergo annual financial audits with financial support from the state or community, respectively. The experience of participating in democratic public youth organizations, as well as in school and student self-government bodies is the primary school of civic education in Ukraine (rather than compulsory theoretical school lessons taught by carriers of totalitarian communist values without any real experience of participation in public life, or in democratic and public civic organizations).

The transparency and publicity of youth councils, youth centers, and youth organizations have increased the involvement of donor and international funds in communities. A 50/50 ratio of resources provided by the community and resources raised from outside the community has been attained. The total financial support of communities and the state has reached the EU minimum of at least 25 euros per young person per year ( for youth work only, excluding investments in education, culture, and sports), both from the local community budget and, independently, from the state budget. Moreover, the mentioned rule of engagement attracts at least the same amount of funds or resources of equal value to the community.

All these policies should be extended by law and regulation to the entire Ukrainian diaspora. In other words, it is recommended to stimulate the creation of youth councils in Ukrainian diaspora communities; to support existing and create new youth councils (with funds from local communities), to support Ukrainian student organizations in universities around the world, as well as community youth organizations (mainly Plast and the Ukrainian Youth Association). The youth mobility of Ukrainian youth in emigration should also be supported (with the financial participation of the respective governments), but in the opposite way, i.e. through visits to the homeland.

2.2 Vision of sports policy

Ukraine 2030 is a developed democracy whose sports policy prioritizes broad involvement in community life, including through participation in sports organizations, and the inclusion of citizens, especially young people, in decision-making at all levels. Decentralization of governance has occurred, in particular, through the support and organizational development of sports institutions as well as through project funding, and as a result, for many Ukrainians, these changes have become one of the factors in their decision to return to Ukraine. 

The active civil society in the sphere of youth and sports, in the post-war period, formed the basic values that influenced the achievement of the following results in the future: freedom of choice for everyone and the sustainability of institutions in open competition, inclusiveness without exception, integrity and solidarity between elite sports and grassroots. For these reasons, in 2030, it is not the state that implements public policy, but civil society in partnership with the state and business. Although sports have been granted autonomy, it remains a priority area, and the state has created the necessary (institutional) infrastructure to support the public sector and grassroots initiatives. 

• 99.9% of Ukrainian schoolchildren, youth, and adults are aware of the exceptional benefits of regular physical activity for their health, and the state is doing its best to create conditions for outdoor activities, the emergence of running, cycling, and walking routes, recreational areas, swimming pools, and indoor gyms

• More than 50% of Ukrainians in general and more than 60% of children have a sufficient level of physical activity, making them more productive and healthy

• Funding for mass sports and physical activity has increased to 100 euros per person per year

The new challenges of the post-war period forced us to look for more effective models, and following the example of Poland in 2010, we redefined the role of sports organizations and introduced new approaches to policy implementation. The package of changes implemented has ensured a systematic reduction in the percentage of the physically and socially inactive population. Many volunteers who wanted to remain useful to society after the war became involved in the realm of sports, and this area has become one of the key pillars for the integration of war veterans into everyday life, the socialization of IDPs, and the rehabilitation of children. 

The concept of “Sport throughout life” has become a crucial one for Ukraine. The main objective has been achieved - Ukrainians demonstrate a high level of physical activity, both during school years and in adulthood or old age. Sport is an integral part of social life. Ukrainian athletes are models of healthy and successful individuals with an active social stance. Former athletes have many opportunities to express themselves in various areas of physical culture and sports, fitness, coaching, and management positions in international organizations and clubs following the completion of their active careers. In Ukraine, it is possible to obtain high-quality managerial, coaching, physical rehabilitation education, etc., which is highly valued in the world. The National Qualifications Framework of Ukraine is fully compliant with The European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (EQF) in sports and is recognized in most countries. The Long Term Athlete Development (LTAD) training system has become the baseline in Ukraine and is bearing fruit. 

In Ukraine 2030, there is a two-tier system (50/50 funding from the state and local budgets) to stimulate children’s and youth sports called “Money Follows Sports Services”, which is approved by the State Program of Basic State Guarantees: 

• First level: to ensure a sufficient level of physical activity for children. The state no longer maintains institutions but compensates for the provision of services in the field of physical culture and sports. Now, every family is entitled to receive compensation for regular training of their child aged 5-17, 3 times a week through the eSupport mechanism in Diia, which has allowed 60% of children to reach the minimum level of physical activity recommended by WHO and form an active lifestyle habit. Such compensation is also available to certain socially protected categories: people with disabilities, war veterans, and senior citizens.

• Second level: ensure the quality selection and competition of young athletes. Cities and unified territorial communities adopt their own programs to support children’s and youth sports and coaches by providing financial support for the training of talented children and their coaches through individual scholarships and grants for equipment, participation in competitions, and infrastructure development. Such funding is available to institutions regardless of their form of ownership.

Cities control the provision of such services at the local level and Diia.Sport simplifies administration and communication. If a child did not receive a sports scholarship, but parents want them to train more and reach a professional level, they can fund the cost of training that was not compensated by the state. In addition, the app makes it easy to change clubs or find out about individual achievements. Now, with 1 click, you can open a sports club, establish a public sports organization, or a private children’s and youth sports school, or register your child with them. Meanwhile, community sports clubs attract more volunteers who want to be useful and do sports with their children. In this way, resilient communities are formed, which become the backbone of the state, and children who have gained positive experience in regular physical activity maintain a healthy lifestyle through the years, becoming the basis of the economically active population of Ukraine and contributing to national and patriotic education. Sport is becoming increasingly popular in the country, so there is no difficulty in attracting additional donors.

The emergence of Diia.Sport in 2023 ensured transparency in the sports sector, 100% automation of the distribution of public funds, which was launched earlier, and data collection on key indicators, prioritizing the provision of quality service for every citizen. 

Diia.Sport hosts a comprehensive system for collecting information on the functioning of the existing sports infrastructure with annual reports that contain not only quantitative but also qualitative indicators: the state of sports infrastructure, its utilization, demand, presence of the necessary conditions for practicing various sports and types of physical activity (equipment, inventory), the number of people engaged in sports by gender, age, region, etc. This makes it possible to estimate the market size and attract private investment, which has a direct impact on decision-making on financing and redistribution of budget funds.

In 2030, the state is a mediator that constantly monitors the attainment of the KPIs and examines the public demand in order to adjust long-term and medium-term budget programs in time. The European model of relations between the state and sports has been introduced, where the autonomy of national sports federations have been achieved, and the Ministry of Sports forms the policy in the sports sector, abolishing the “manual” budget allocation. The state does not lobby for private interests and does not encourage monopolies. Such autonomy of sports has facilitated the rapid development of institutions and the attraction of investments from the private sector. The share of the physical activity and amateur sports sector exceeds 3% of the GDP, and due to increased physical activity and lifestyle changes, the average life expectancy of Ukrainians has increased by 5 years.

The implementation of a set of solutions for the democratization of sports, a moderate public policy, a change in priorities, a preventive approach and subsidies for physically active citizens for not using the services of the public healthcare system, a financial incentive program that partially exempts employers from taxes if they encourage their employees to enhance their level of physical activity have already had a socio-economic effect in 2030:

• 4% increase in average labor productivity

5-year increase in the average life expectancy of Ukrainians in 2030 ( provided they have been doing sports for at least 10 years) up to 77 years, including a healthy life of 70 years;

• The share of the physical activity sector, amateur sports, and related industries accounts for 3% of the country’s GDP;

• Every 1 euro invested in physical activity and amateur sports generates 15 euros of income in the form of additional GDP and 5 euros in the form of revenues to the State Budget of Ukraine;

The Ukrainian model of sports exhibits all the features of a democratic European model and is an integral part of Ukraine’s economy. As a full member of the EU, Ukraine has fully synchronized with the European standards and norms enshrined in the Treaty of Lisbon, White Paper on Sport, and other fundamental documents, the Erasmus+ Program is being fully implemented, and a new democratic Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of State Policy in the Field of Physical Activity of Citizens and Sports No. 2834-IX of December 13, 2022, has been adopted. 

The new law established self-sufficient democratic institutions of sports federations (associations), which in turn consist of sports clubs ( community organizations), as the basis of Ukrainian sport. These have taken over the management and administrative functions of developing their respective sport from the state and meet the criteria of good governance (Principles of good governance in sport). In cooperation with the federation, the clubs deal with problematic issues such as sports marketing education, infrastructure development, coach training, and licensing, advocacy of club interests, etc. They are the basis of sports federations and establish sports leagues, programs for war veterans, people with intellectual disabilities, people with disabilities, people with mental and psychological problems, as well as sports rehabilitation programs for drug and alcohol addicts, providing subsidies for socially vulnerable groups. These updated public sports institutions apply for additional funding for their activities from the state and local budgets, just like other civil society organizations, on a competitive basis and under the state’s priorities. Now, every hryvnia spent from the state budget is reported and used to achieve the set goals, while bureaucratic reporting procedures are simplified as much as possible, as Diia.Sport allows the state to verify all the necessary indicators and every citizen who receives a physical education or sports service for budgetary funds, whereas clubs, sports schools, and sports federations only administer their data.

The system of high-performance sports has been improved. An effective fight against doping is underway, the anti-doping standards of WADA and the Council of Europe have been implemented, and punishment for doping is inevitable in the country. The National Olympic Committee of Ukraine, the relevant sports federations, other associations, professional leagues, and private businesses are fully engaged in elite sports. The state does not interfere in determining their development vectors or any issues related to labor relations with athletes, holding competitions, and participation in international competitions. Compliance with the criteria of integrity is fundamental in the relations between the state and sports and fitness organizations. The state determines its long-term priorities for financial support of athletes’ preparation for international competitions. At the same time, it is the federations that are responsible for the popularization and development of their sport, and the state, through its programs, helps those who wish to become more institutionally robust. Ukraine legislates the relevant norms required by international structures and directives. The state’s influence in this segment is minimal and remains at the level of cooperation in the implementation of mutually beneficial projects and public consultations as part of amending legislation and regulations.

A healthy nation and an economically active population are a priority for the Ukrainian state of the future. Involvement in regular physical activity and mass sports has been recognized at the state level as a high-priority policy vector, attracting adequate attention and state funding. The war ended with Ukraine’s victory, but we have faced new challenges to respond to: the return of refugees, the integration of internally displaced persons and war veterans, and the permanent threats of the modern world still loom over the country, so state funding is focused on sports that help teach Ukrainians to unite for the sake of achieving common goals, provide basic safety skills and endurance, teach mutual respect, and engage young people. And sport in the Armed Forces of Ukraine is primarily a tool for training a combat-ready army and its reserve.

Policy-making is carried out by specialists of the relevant Directorate of the central executive body, which is responsible for the formation and implementation of state policy in the field of sports, and ensures synchronization of the policy vector with the education, healthcare, and defense systems. Its main objective is to make managerial decisions only based on verified data, constant analytical work, and the obligatory involvement of civil society and related businesses. 

The Active Nation Foundation has become the main institution that funds programs for the development and institutional support of mass sports, physical activity of Ukrainian citizens, civil society organizations of physical culture and sports, as well as support for grassroots initiatives, physical rehabilitation, and the integration of veterans of the war with Russia through sports. Multidisciplinary programs enable the necessary research and the implementation of interregional, international, and cross-sectoral projects. Winning projects are selected through the government portal VzayemoDiia. Financial support for grassroots initiatives and their impact on engaging Ukrainians in physical activity and sports, developing civil society and volunteering, and stimulating the economy are closely monitored, and best practices are popularized. 

The main task of the state and local authorities in Ukraine 2030 is to make recreational sports accessible to everyone, which makes it their mandate to develop sports infrastructure, including bicycle routes, and support children’s and inclusive sports. Conditions have been created for recreational sports in regional centers, villages, and near homes of young people, the elderly, and active people: multifunctional sports grounds, mini-stadiums, gyms, and fitness facilities have been built. Every settlement with a population of more than 20,000 people has a physical culture and sports facility or a sports club. All major parks offer areas for active leisure. Cities are safe to ride a bicycle or scooter thanks to high-quality bicycle infrastructure. 100% of public sports facilities are adapted for the mobility of people with disabilities and low-mobility groups. These sports centers are open to everyone, with training schedules available online and rental hours available through an online booking system.

The basis for the development of sports infrastructure is the Sports Infrastructure Development Concept with long-term geoplanning, financing, and targeted priorities. It is integrated into local programs and the National Recovery Plan of Ukraine. In Ukraine, within the framework of approved programs, only publicly accessible sports infrastructure is built using budget funding, based on the principle: first and foremost, for the community, with attention to the needs of both men and women, people of different ages, states of health, and taking into account the demand of potential consumers. 

As part of the National Recovery Plan of Ukraine, a multidisciplinary community center has been established in each territorial community. Such centers are being established near educational institutions, including in de-occupied cities and communities. Such community centers have become the foundation for change and have made it possible to combine several functions at once: lessons for schoolchildren, leisure for young people, and leisure for the local community. During the educational process, schoolchildren and students use the gyms of such centers, where competitions are held, and after classes, the local community and sports clubs meet there, and concerts, networking events, and celebrations are held. In addition to sports, such community centers also meet the cultural and other educational needs of local communities. The introduction of this approach has increased the efficiency of sports facilities and improved their financial model and the quality of services. Schools received new modern gyms that are available for use during certain hours, which significantly reduced their administrative costs. These facilities are managed by independent management companies with a supervisory board whose main task is to maximize the utilization of the facility and the comfort of the conditions, taking into account the public interest.

Olympic Training Centers (OTCs) by sport are integrated with the competition infrastructure and are open to all potential consumers; they have evolved into actual sports academies, and new Class A multifunctional centers are being built on private initiative in cooperation with local governments. The public-private partnership mechanism is fully operational. 

A system of hourly rental of all municipal sports facilities is in place, which has brought gyms (including school gyms) into the reach of every sports club or group of enthusiasts, eliminated the monopoly, and unshadowed the cash flow which has become a significant contribution to the major renovations of these facilities.

Much attention is paid to the extracurricular development of children through public sports clubs at schools and community centers. Every Ukrainian school operates a sports club, which has the appropriate infrastructure and equipment and is connected through a system of local school leagues, with stands in the schools, so parents and friends always attend children’s competitions, and a solid movement is formed, similar to the situation with student leagues. These clubs have helped small towns and communities effectively engage children (both boys and girls) in sports. They also employ many volunteers. Physical education classes in schools have undergone dramatic changes and have become a tool for children to unwind (involving boys and girls, without gender stereotypes), play actively, and learn vital skills (for example, swimming, which can save many lives), rather than a graded obligation. Schools are the foundation for popularizing sports and shaping the value of physical activity in a child’s life.

At the same time, the updated model for the development of recreational health sports/physical activity and organized sports through sports clubs allows more and more of the adult population to continue to participate in sports and exercise regularly. The new system does not push out “under-talented” teenagers or students who have grown up and changed their place of residence. The clubs are committed to engaging as many Ukrainians as possible in an active lifestyle at any age, which will have a significant impact on the number and quality of the economically active population by 2030. 

The club system is evolving independently and stimulates the development of sports and the economy. Thanks to the equal conditions created for children and youth sports schools and public sports clubs as well as the system of incentives, in 2030:

• The number of sports clubs of various forms of ownership has already reached 20,000 and is showing positive dynamics

• 10% of Ukrainians are members of organized communities – youth and sports civil society organizations that have become the foundation for change 

An effective communication strategy has been initiated which motivates and fosters a culture of sports and physical activity among Ukrainians. Therefore, citizens are willing to spend up to 10% of their income on sports, as they understand that this will save up to 30% of treatment costs due to improved health. Ukrainian athletes and coaches are role models of professionalism and success for Ukrainians, have multimillion-dollar contracts, and are able to implement their own initiatives in cooperation with the state.

3. KEY ISSUES TO BE SOLVED TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED OUTCOMES IN THE YOUTH AND SPORTS POLICY

3.1 Totalitarian (undemocratic) practices of imitative nature

In the management of youth centers, in the creation and functioning of youth councils (often created for beautiful single or multiple photo opportunities for social media), various “networks” and campaigns initiated by the authorities (often in spite of existing civic campaigns). Interpretation of civic education as a theoretical course (while real civic education through in-school self-government remains a facade controlled by the administration of educational institutions, without the possibility of institutionalization, even through independent resources). This problem is also reflected in the fact that the political activity of students, which is a basic and supported component of university autonomy in the world’s leading universities, is still prohibited in Ukrainian universities. Meanwhile, the membership of professors or rectors in political parties remains both permitted and unbanned by law (as a result, entire campuses vote in elections mainly for the political party of their rector or for a political force that they publicly support).

Regulatory and legal framework

1. The Law of Ukraine On Local Self-Government No. 280/97-ВР of May 21, 1997, contains amendments that will strengthen the participation of children and youth in decision-making. 

2. The Law of Ukraine On Political Parties in Ukraine No. 2365-III of April 05, 2001, should specifically define the role and place of youth party organizations in the party structure, including quotas at all levels of party governing bodies, a fixed percentage of funds from the state budget, and special quotas for participation of representatives of youth party organizations in elections.

3. The Law of Ukraine On Higher Education No. 1556-VII of July 1, 2014, should enable the establishment of youth branches of political parties within student self-government bodies (SGBs), including the right to use SGB funds and conduct political education. The law should prohibit all rectors and senior administrators from membership in parties. 

4. The Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy No. 1414-IX of April 27, 2021, should regulate the system of organization for regional youth councils as representative of the majority within communities, rather than individual activists or organizations. And the National Youth Council should be formed largely from authorized representatives of regional youth councils (representatives of all-Ukrainian youth organizations can join the National Council directly, but by no more than one-third, or through regional youth councils). Youth representatives within the Supervisory Board of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation, as well as the permanent board, are elected from the members of the National Council. All decisions of the National Council are made both at semi-annual meetings (forums) and immediately through online voting.

Institutional changes

1. The current vertical system of youth centers is based on the idea of top-down coordination, while any effective youth activity is primarily grassroots and horizontal. With this in view, the issue of liquidating the All-Ukrainian Youth Center as a structure that imposes its coordinating role on regional and local youth centers should be considered. Local youth centers should play the role of the key unit, while regional (oblast) centers should serve as hubs for analyzing and generalizing best practices. The state does not need a national structure to spread best practices. Possibly, an annual national forum of youth centers should be institutionalized, where representatives on the ground will share their best practices and achievements. 

2. The Ukrainian Youth Foundation is an important national structure, which should also gain an understanding of grassroots initiatives and focus on supporting and then spreading them. 

3. The Foundation should support, among other things, the youth wings of parties that will act within the framework of the Law of Ukraine On Political Parties and student self-government, which should be granted the right of a legal entity under the Law of Ukraine On Higher Education No. 1556-VII of July 1, 2014, and the Law of Ukraine On Public Associations No. 4572-VI of March 22, 2012.  

4. The operating procedures of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation should become democratic, through an independent Supervisory Board, and the participation of young people in the management of the Foundation through the National Youth Council should be real, not imitative. 

Funding

The implementation of changes can be ensured through existing (pre-war level) resources, as long as the approach to providing financial support for youth initiatives is changed from project support to institutional capacity support. This will require significant adjustments, starting with the state budget and ending with changes to the regulations of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation.

Communication of reforms to society

The decisions should be implemented by youth councils, party youth groups, associations of student self-government bodies, and national networks of youth organizations in cooperation with local governments, political parties, higher education institutions, and central executive authorities responsible for youth policy. The greatest opponents to the implementation of this decision will be fake children’s and youth organizations, heads of local self-government, leaders of political parties, and heads of higher education institutions prone to using undemocratic instruments of influence.  Obstacles can be expected due to the fact that the declared groups or individuals will have to give up some of the resources intended to support the democratization of the youth movement.

3.2 Opaque nature of youth organizations and institutions, non-transparency and non-publicity

This problem also manifests itself in the fact that the civil sector is dominated by clique-like organizations engaging in mutual cover-ups, as this simplifies raising and distributing donor and budget funds among themselves. Real democratic governance with, if not mass membership, then at least a large membership base that has to be reported to, is, as an experience, not encouraged by anyone. Consequently, a whole stratum of handheld quasi-legitimate organizations has emerged – always ready to support the course of the current government at the national or local level and outnumbering the real sector of civil society in Ukraine. These relations form a false culture of public affairs, which ultimately leads not only to financial abuse in the sector, but also to the strengthening of authoritarian, undemocratic, and non-transparent practices of the government, education system, political system, and civil society itself, including the youth segment. For many activists of the youth movement, the experience of working with budgetary funds, and even with a number of donor funds, becomes the first taste of actual gray corruption (laundering funds on some expenses to cover those that are not being provided for; not receiving funds in general, as these are assigned to certain predetermined organizations that politically or financially serve the relevant group of officials or managers of the donor organization).

Regulatory and legal framework

1. The Law of Ukraine On Public Associations No. 4572-VI of March 22, 2012, should encourage not only quick registration of organizations but also the cooperation of existing organizations and networking through separate subdivisions, as well as publicity of organizations through transparent annual reports. In particular, Article 23 “Financial support and reporting of civic associations” of the Law of Ukraine On Public Associations No. 4572-VI of March 22, 2012, should require the publication of full financial reports for all activities of the organization when receiving financial support from the State Budget of Ukraine and local budgets on the websites of the institutions that were granted such support. 

2. To ensure transparency and integrity, the Law of Ukraine On Public Associations should be amended to ensure that at least 10-20% of representatives in supervisory boards are not members of the organization.

3. In order to avoid a conflict of interest between the central executive body responsible for youth policy and the Supervisory Board of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation, Article 23 “Basic Principles of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation” of the Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy No. 1414-IX of April 27, 2021, and the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 182 of February 28, 2023, “Some Issues of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation” should prescribe the procedure for the formation and appointment of members of the Supervisory Board of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation, in which such appointments will be made based on the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers. 

4. To ensure the institutional stability and independence of organizations working with youth, the Budget Code of Ukraine and the regulatory framework should include the possibility (obligation) of co-financing projects by local governments or donor organizations.

Institutional changes

1. All civil society organizations can receive funds from the state or local governments only if they become fully transparent and public. To develop transparency and publicity of organizations working with youth (including student self-government bodies and youth party organizations), the state should encourage them by supporting the preparation and publication of reports and audits.  The state should organize and encourage local self-government bodies (LSG) to hold competitions for institutional support of public and transparent organizations and award them. 

2. The central executive body responsible for youth policy should encourage the creation and development of networks of organizations working with youth. To this end, it should create an appropriate policy for verifying the membership base of organizations working with youth. Since the Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy No. 1414-IX of April 27, 2021, stipulates that the membership in youth organizations is fixed, organizations applying for budget funds, including institutional support, must confirm their membership (number, geography). 

Funding

1. Any support provided by the state or local governments to organizations working with youth should include funds for the preparation of annual reports and their mandatory publication. 

2. Norms should be introduced to provide greater financial support for organizations that can prove their membership base of hundreds or thousands of members who regularly pay membership fees and participate in democratic governance.

3. Support of additional payments to those organizations that raise funds for salaries should be introduced (this model is in effect in France, where about 5000 public employees of civil society receive additional payments from the state, which makes them competitive against the market).

4. Citizens and businesses should be granted the right to “interest-based philanthropy” in their support of non-profit civic associations, including youth organizations, envisaging tax exemptions. As a means of positive discrimination in favor of organizations working with youth, the state can provide another hryvnia for every one hryvnia that a civic organization raises.

5. A competition for state endowments in state-owned banks should be designed and launched for youth organizations (instead of an annual budget, it is better to immediately invest a three-year total amount of interest which the organization can freely dispose of for its statutory activities, and if the organization is able to raise one such amount over a certain period, the state endowment is retained and is no longer subject to return).

6. Legislation should guarantee a full refund of endowments for public and transparent organizations that work with youth in the first category of refunds in case of bankruptcy of a bank (state or commercial).

Communication of reforms to society

The opacity of the youth sector directly depends on the instruments of its financial support with budgetary funds. The reform cannot be implemented without a paradigm shift in the attitude toward young people and their initiatives. The key stakeholder – and yet also the greatest opponent of the implementation of these reforms is the Ministry of Finance, which still practices the Soviet approach of a factual absence of independent NGOs and fails to see the point of supporting such organizations in any way. They are deemed “anti-Soviet” (anti-state, “those that are stealing budget money or running at the expense of the state”) according to the Ministry of Finance. In EU countries, the budget system serves the comprehensive financial support of the youth sector and is built on confidence in young people. Until the Ministry of Finance changes its attitude to the financial support of the youth sector, young people will continue to emigrate en masse to EU countries, where they are the state’s core value, not a potential money-stealing entity.

3.3 The communist notion of youth being   “our [bright] future”

On a subconscious level, this means that young people are valuable, but they are not currently needed and there are no funds for them. There are more important tasks, such as building roads or other priorities of the “bright future” envisioned for the community – or their own (affiliated) business. As a result, the highest percentage of emigration tendencies is expressed by young people, who do not see any prospects in their community. Following the habit of the communist era, the community invests resources in young people through kindergartens, educational institutions, and extracurricular activities, yet is still unable to offer opportunities for worthy self-fulfillment.   

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Budget and Tax Codes of Ukraine in the relevant sections. 

2. The Law of Ukraine On State Targeted Programs No. 1621-IV of March 18, 2004 (in full). 

3. Procedure for the use of budget funds, which recognizes financial support for projects and activities of organizations working with youth within the policies of central executive authorities responsible for supporting youth initiatives (Ministry of Youth, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Veteran Affairs, Ministry of Social Policy, Ministry of Culture and Information Policy, etc.)

4. The State Targeted Social Program “Youth of Ukraine” for 2021-2025, approved by the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 579 of June 2, 2021, and the specialized targeted programs to be approved for the following periods should include measures aimed at increasing the institutional capacity of youth and children’s civil society organizations and initiatives.

Institutional changes

1. Civil society and the state need not only to reach a sufficient level of funding for youth initiatives in communities but also to constantly create new, convenient, and modern instruments of financial support while eliminating the stream of activities overregulated by officials. 

2. There can be no events that are funded annually simply because “it’s always been that way” (the Ministry of Education and Science hosts many such non-competitive events dating back to the USSR, funded under “protected items of expenditure” without any competition). 

3. It is necessary to introduce not just financial instruments, but a better evaluation expertise. Friendly competition should be encouraged, which would be based on the number of organizations. 

4. In the context of budgetary austerity, funds for youth policy should be prioritized in the following order: 1) institutional support for organizations that work with youth and youth centers; 2) training of those who organize youth work; 3) support for initiatives and projects of already trained organizers of youth work. It is unacceptable that effective youth organizations don’t have the funds to pursue institutional activities while meaningless one-off events are still held. 

5. It is necessary to provide young people with real opportunities for influence. Through youth councils and quotas for young people in political parties. Similarly, political education should be allowed in universities and even high schools. Both the recognition of influence and the admission is a direct consequence of financial support instruments for the relevant categories of youth.

Funding

1. Procedures for the use of budgetary funds should stipulate the most effective financial support for youth work, which is realized through:

1. Strengthening the institutional capacity of organizations working with youth and community youth centers (support for both should be proportional to their actual coverage of the respective number of young people, for example, as out-of-school education institutions); 

2. training of human capital (with one trained specialist covering 15-30 young people with quality youth work);

3. more cost-effective events with fewer participants but meaningful youth work, and fewer one-time expensive mass events.

Communication of reforms to society

Government and public service officials, who are the main stakeholders and the main opponents of this reform, should adopt the thesis that  “youth is here and now”. In fact, very little is needed to support the initiatives of young people who are just entering the labor market: a) to have their voices not only heard but also taken into account; b) to have a warm and lighted place with free Wi-Fi access where they can prepare and implement their civic, business, or even private (family-friendly) projects. Moreover, there is no need to invest heavily in young people; as the experience of EU countries shows, it is enough to invest at least 20-40 euros in youth work (not youth policy!) per young person per year. And not in the future, but on a yearly basis, starting now.

3.4 The threat of 50% or more of Ukrainian youth emigrating

At present, neither the state nor the communities have invested a single penny in Ukrainian youth in emigration (perhaps such investments have been made, but they are unknown to us). If we assume the pre-war statistics of the Ukrainian World Congress indicating that 20 million Ukrainians live worldwide, i.e. outside of Ukraine, (this figure of 20 million was voiced by President Zelenskyy in his inaugural speech), this means that 5-7 million of them are young people. After February 24, 2022, according to various sources, up to half of underage children and youth went abroad, which translates to about 5 million more. Therefore, we now find ourselves in a situation where half or even most Ukrainian children and adolescents (youth) live in emigration. They learn languages there, which is good, but they also adapt and gradually lose contact with their homeland. That is, Ukraine is already, and not in the future, losing not only its workforce pool but also the investment potential of those who will not return.

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Article 23 “Basic Principles of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation” of the Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy No. 1414-IX of April 27, 2021, and the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 182 of February 28, 2023, “Some Issues of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation” should extend the authority of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation and envisage the possibility of supporting Ukrainian youth initiatives and projects abroad, as well as offering institutional backing.

2. Amendments to the Budget Code of Ukraine to enable youth organizations, including Ukrainian youth in the diaspora, to receive funding through bank accounts, not the Treasury. Accordingly, after an organization’s project wins the tender, it receives the corresponding amount that was presented in the estimate without additional approval from the Treasury. The regulation should be amended to enable organizations to use the funds provided without excessive control, but in case of unauthorized use, law enforcement agencies would deal with this violation.

3. It is necessary to amend the bylaws adopted in pursuance of the Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy to introduce this model of obtaining funding, as well as to provide diaspora non-institutionalized structures with the opportunity to apply for funding.

Institutional changes

Launch competitions for Ukrainian youth in the diaspora. No one else can train those who work abroad with Ukrainians in the context of forming Ukrainian national identity, so there should be a special program to support educators working there, which would include funding for the training for coaches and an exchange program with Ukraine, where educators both from the diaspora and from Ukraine would have the opportunity to exchange experiences over the course of a year.  

Create a youth component for the Ukrainian Institute. Engage young people who left Ukraine because of the war and are planning to return within the Insitute’s branches and abroad. The main focus should lie on involving the potential of Ukrainian youth, which has expanded through their education and work experience in the EU, in the rebuilding of Ukraine.

Funding

Within the expenditures planned for the Ukrainian Youth Foundation. At the same time, a crowdfunding platform (or a corresponding section on the United24 platform) could be launched to raise targeted funds to support projects of young people, including diaspora youth. 

The Ukrainian Institute needs significant state support, given Ukraine’s role in international communication today and the number of Ukrainians who have found themselves abroad as a result of the war.

Communication of reforms to society

It is up to the government and diaspora NGOs to implement changes. The Ministry of Finance will be the most reluctant for traditional reasons of economic austerity. At the same time, the consequences of not implementing these changes will be catastrophic, as young people who do not find themselves in the Ukrainian environment abroad will likely be much less motivated to interact with Ukraine in any way. If we implement the reform, we may provoke some tension between the “old” and the “new” diasporas, which will compete for new resources, but this competition will be beneficial for young people, who will receive better services.

Steps/stages of change in youth policy

1. Introduction of necessary amendments to the legislation, primarily to the Budget and Tax Codes of Ukraine, as well as the Law of Ukraine On the Basic Principles of Youth Policy.

2. The functions of formulating and implementing state policy should be separated. Implementation can be ensured mainly through the Ukrainian Youth Foundation. And policy formulation should be coordinated by a government commissioner (or a minister who does not head a ministry) in each ministry, not in one specialized ministry.

3. Improving the governance procedures of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation – strengthening youth participation and introducing procedures that guarantee transparency. 

4. Securing the formation and effective operation of the National Youth Council. 

5. Simplifying the requirements for obtaining public funding for civic organizations. 

6. Introduction of institutional support for civic organizations. Endowments. 

7. Liquidation of the All-Ukrainian Youth Center, and decentralization of policy implementation by youth centers in the regions according to local needs. 

8. Improving competitive procedures for funding the activities of civic organizations, creating opportunities for diaspora youth - both for organizations and non-institutionalized groups – to receive funding. 

9. Implementing effective training programs for youth work professionals based on the needs of all of Ukraine and the diaspora. 

10. Strengthening youth involvement in political processes, in particular by improving approaches to the activities of youth organizations of political parties, as well as political education through student self-government bodies.

Criteria for evaluating  the success/failure of the youth policy reform

The reform will be considered successful if in every community:

A youth council is in place, established in the community’s charter, which has a real impact on decision-making regarding youth and represents at least 50% of the community’s youth.  

A municipal youth center has been established and is functioning, which reaches all young people in the community on a monthly basis, both independently and through its branches.

For every 15-30 young people, there is a trained youth work professional who organizes youth work on a weekly basis. The community also provides methodological, psychological, and other support to these specialists. 

There are two or three branches of national network organizations. At least 15-20% of the community’s youth are members of national or local organizations working with youth, pay membership fees and participate in the democratic governance of these organizations. 

Proactive youth have the opportunity to receive financial support for the implementation of a youth project within a month of developing a youth project idea. 

Every year, 30% of the community’s youth visit other regions of Ukraine for educational purposes, including at least 10% who travel to EU countries for the same purpose.

All youth centers are safe and meet the quality standards of the Association of Youth Centers of Ukraine or equivalent. Each educational institution has a youth space as a branch of the youth center. 

The percentage of young people in the community is stable or increasing and reaches at least 30%.

There is at least one socially responsible business founded and run primarily by young people.

The reform is to be considered unsuccessful if:

The lack of institutional capacity of national networks of organizations working with youth will lead to the absence of branches in most communities in Ukraine, as well as advocacy for relevant reforms at the national and local levels. In addition, the percentage of young people leaving the community is at least 22-24%.

There will be no institutional changes in the system of authorities responsible for the formation and implementation of youth policy. 

The institutional independence of the Ukrainian Youth Foundation will not be ensured, and as a result, it remains under the influence of the authorities, unable to provide fast and high-quality support to youth initiatives.

4. POLICY FOR SOLVING ISSUES IN THE YOUTH AND SPORTS POLICY IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF 2030  

4.1 The present state system lacks the instruments and competencies for successful reform

The role of sports and physical activity needs to be entirely redefined. Currently, we have a closed system that closely links the Ministry and the main (financial) beneficiaries - sports federations and other organizations financed from the state budget, which overwhelmingly do not recognize the need for a profound restructuring, thus making it impossible to launch a full-fledged reform for many years. In other words, the very need to introduce new social relations to replace the established ones is rejected, and therefore no solutions are sought. While before the full-scale invasion, civil society emphasized that the reform was long overdue and the only remedy was to find a more effective model, now the processes have accelerated and the existing problems have become apparent not only to industry experts. However, the Ministry of Youth and Sports, as the executive body that is supposed to formulate state policy in this area, continues to work on programs that are mainly focused on the development of high-performance sports, while maintaining its management functions, without a constant inclusive dialogue with the entire sports community. 

When starting systemic changes, it is necessary to make sure that the existing institutions are capable of implementing them, that the digital infrastructure for data collection is in place, that bureaucratic procedures are streamlined, and that the human and financial resources are available. The transformation entails multilevel tasks that require more flexible tools and the creation of a radically new infrastructure of government agencies with specialists who possess the expertise and comprehensive understanding of the necessary changes. 

By simplifying the reporting procedures and systems, the state will demonopolize its influence and open up sports to those who are currently afraid of bureaucracy but have the momentum and expertise, which will simultaneously help attract more people to sports in the broadest sense of the word.

Ukraine is one of the leaders in the implementation of public digital services, and it is new technologies that can become the basis of Ukraine’s breakthrough from the post-Soviet sports system to building a system of incentives based on three simple principles: “people at the center of everything” and “evidence-based decision-making”. 

Regulatory and legal framework

1. The reform is based on the development and adoption of the new Law of Ukraine On Reforming the Sphere of Sports and Physical Culture, which will reflect all transformational changes and in the future will completely replace the norms of the current Law of Ukraine On Physical Culture and Sports;

2. Amend the Law of Ukraine On Public Associations to reflect the differences between non-governmental sports organizations – federations and clubs, in accordance with the updated Charter;

3. Adoption of a number of CMU Resolutions that will ensure the emergence of new institutions to implement the planned changes: the Active Nation Foundation, the State Agency for a Healthy Nation, and the platform Diia.Sport, as well as the abolition of a number of existing Resolutions and Regulations;

4. Abolition of the Unified Sports Classification (USC) of Ukraine, approval of The European Qualifications Framework (EQF) for sports personnel;

5. Amendments to the Standard Program Classification of Local Budget Expenditures and Lending, under the classification code 5000 “Physical Culture and Sports”. 

Institutional changes 

1. Establishment of an independent structure, similar to others under the Reforms Office of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, which will ensure the development and coordination of sectoral reform between the state, civil society, and business, and will be able to additionally engage the necessary experts;

2. Completion of the reform of the Ministry of Youth and Sports with the division of functions into state policy formulation and implementation. It would be beneficial to optimize the state apparatus and integrate the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Ukraine into the structure of a larger Ministry that would comprehensively deal with human capital development, with the policy-making function performed by the relevant Directorate for the Development of Recreational Sports and Physical Health;

3. Establishment of the State Agency for a Healthy Nation, which will take over some of the functions of implementing policy in the field of recreational sports and engaging Ukrainians in regular physical activity and healthy lifestyles;

4. Creation of the Active Nation Foundation as the main instrument for financing competitive programs and projects for sports NGOs, initiatives, and municipalities, and institutional support for the reform;

5. Expanding the Diia service to include sports. Launch of end-user services, as well as a platform for managing processes and obtaining data needed to make quality managerial decisions. Moving away from the classic system of statistical reporting through forms (1-ФК, 2-ФК, 5-ФК). Automation of processes, public disclosure of the criteria for the distribution of state funding among federations, the introduction of a comprehensive system for monitoring attendance and physical activity tracking;

6. Elimination of inefficient state institutions and state-owned enterprises through which the state manages sports, with the transfer of their functions to civil society;

7. Delegation of sports management functions to a confederation/association consolidating under its umbrella civil society institutions in the field of sports responsible for the development of their respective sport in compliance with the principles of Good Governance in Sports;

8. Introduce educational programs and exchanges to train qualified personnel, both in the public sector and in key sports federations. Using the instruments of the Presidential Foundation for Support of Education, Science and Sports, and including in cooperation with the EU Erasmus+ Program and other EU programs for the development of civil society.

Funding

1. Introducing a competitive approach to public funding based on criteria in line with priorities. Completion of the state experiment on the involvement of national sports federations in the organization and conduct of sports events by the Ministry of Youth and Sports; 

2. The state financial instrument at all levels should move away from default and become a stimulating factor for the development of the sector while reducing bureaucratic procedures and demonopolizing should provide opportunities to attract investment and bring cash flow out of the shadows, preventing further duplication of funding programs;  

3. The crucial point is to ensure a balance of public funding between different types of sports and the involvement of the population in physical activity and recreational sports. The minimum 50/50 ratio of expenditures from the budgets of all levels should be enshrined in the State Strategy for the Development of Physical Culture and Sports, state and targeted programs with the corresponding revision of programs of classifications of budget expenditures, implementation instruments, and control over the implementation of approved norms; 

4. Introduction of a two-tier system of state funding for children’s and youth sports: compensation for physical culture and sports services that ensure a sufficient level of physical activity for children and, separately, ensuring quality selection and competition of young athletes within the framework of state priorities. All physical culture and sports entities that train children, regardless of their form of ownership, should be entitled to receive compensation for the provision of such services, in the amount approved by the relevant local council. It is necessary to provide a legal way for parents to cover additional costs not provided for in the budget;

5. Simplification of the procedure for financial support of civic organizations within the framework of targeted programs through opening treasury accounts. This instrument is very limited and complicated for most civic organizations in small communities, which makes it virtually impossible to engage them in cooperation with local authorities;

6. Financial support for the work of specialists who formulate and implement the reform, automation of processes to optimize the personnel involved, and provision of institutional support from the budgets of public associations to strengthen their capacity.

4.2. Low level of physical activity of Ukrainians and involvement in recreational health sports

Until February 24, this field received funding on a residual basis, and involvement in recreational sports was largely driven by private initiatives without appropriate government incentives. The war has complicated the situation significantly. 

In 2020, the State Strategy for the Development of Physical Culture and Sports for the period up to 2028 was approved, with one of its objectives being the development of a “physically active nation” and the achievement of the benchmark of 30% of Ukrainians regularly and consciously engaging in physical activity or sports. However, state funding and relevant programs have not yet undergone significant changes. The state has not reoriented its programs to actively engage the population and foster a physically and mentally healthy nation. Such recognition is currently declarative, and the idea of “Ukrainians being an active and healthy nation” has not yet been able to gain a foothold as one of the country’s national ideas due to low attention to the problem and the lack of effective mechanisms for implementing the Strategy’s objectives. Currently, it is difficult to assess the results of engaging the physically inactive population through the state program “Active Parks – Locations of a Healthy Nation”, as there is no systematic monitoring of the level of Ukrainians’ involvement in physical activity, while the hostilities have significantly complicated access to exercise, and many of the program’s activities involve children from operating sports groups and practicing athletes.  

The emergence of programs and tools that will stimulate the development of recreational health sports and physical activity in the public policy paradigm is extremely important. The low level of physical activity among Ukrainians has a negative impact not only on their physical and mental health and well-being but also on the economy of Ukraine. 

Firstly, sport is good for health, and as a result, people are less likely to be absent from work due to illness, poor physical and psycho-emotional condition. 

Secondly, sport helps to reduce presenteeism through the impact of physical activity on mental health (sport as an antidepressant). 

Involvement in regular physical activity and recreational sports can become a booster for Ukraine’s economic growth, both through the creation of new added value chains – consumption and production of goods and services, construction and modernization of sports infrastructure facilities – and through increased labor productivity and longer life expectancy. In addition, sport is an effective tool for socialization, and the introduction of the club system will greatly help in solving the problem of democratization of society through the tools of election and collective decision-making in such public sports clubs. In recent years, the demand for quick wins and simple solutions has been cultivated, but changes in sports take time and are deeply social in nature. The state should proclaim the policy vector of emphasizing the importance of recreational sports, regular physical activity, and citizen participation in policy implementation and move forward until all structural changes are implemented. 

A high level of physical fitness in the population is critical for a country under constant threat of war. Therefore, in the post-war period, the country should pay great attention to the high level of physical fitness of the population (both men and women), the integration of sports into the lives of Ukrainians (including middle-aged people), which will allow for a constant high level of physical fitness of potential reservists, and sufficient attention to the rehabilitation of war veterans in different regions. Sport is an extremely underrated tool for social inclusion. Vulnerable groups should not be artificially segregated, and their rehabilitation and involvement in recreational sports should be integrated into a single new Ukrainian sports system. All state/local programs should take into account the component of inclusion of vulnerable groups and encourage private initiatives to create conditions for the training of such groups. To achieve the desired targets for the involvement of Ukrainians in regular physical activity (50% of the total population and 60% of children), it is necessary to almost triple the efficiency of the sports sector, and this is possible only through the implementation of a whole range of changes by developing a sporty civil society.

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Update the State Targeted Program and relevant budget programs, in particular (3401220 “Development of Physical Culture, High-performance Sports and Reserve Sports”);

2. Revise and finalize the current Strategy, which should shape the vector for the development of physical culture and sports for at least 15 years, based on the current situation as of 2023;

3. Develop a comprehensive Ukrainian analog of the Physical Activity Guidelines;

4. Include Ukraine in the systematic monitoring of the physical activity of the population by Eurobarometer;

5. To develop and approve state social indicators for the provision of services and social standards in the field of physical culture and sports, as well as the Program of Basic State Guarantees for Physical Activity, which will help launch the mechanism of “money following sports services” in communities and move from maintaining training facilities to compensating end users for the services received;

6. The development of appropriate sports infrastructure in cities plays an important role in this matter, which is why experts should also develop a comprehensive Sports Infrastructure Development Program that will focus on community infrastructure and the types of physical activity that are most likely to encourage people to be active, as well as introduce new standards for school sports infrastructure in accordance with international best practices and define state priorities for the recovery period;

7. Based on the revised State Strategy and Targeted Program, develop regional strategies and local programs to promote physical activity, following the example of those developed for Mariupol before the full-scale invasion. The relevant Directorate of the respective Ministry can assist cities and ATCs in developing such strategies and updating targeted programs;

8. Development and approval of State social standards for the provision of services in the field of physical culture and sports;

9. Development and approval of the Procedure for reimbursement of the cost of providing services in the field of physical culture and sports for the population.

Institutional changes 

1. In addition to regular physical activity, an important factor is increasing the number of Ukrainians who choose recreational sports, including for physical and mental recovery from war trauma. An effective tool for this would be the introduction of a club system that meets the key features and principles of the European Sports Charter, with appropriate reflection in the relevant law. Stimulating the development of active grassroots initiatives that engage children, adults, people with disabilities, and senior citizens in active lifestyles instead of state institutions and facilities. However, to effectively launch the network, a Club Support Program is needed, which can be implemented through the educational component of the Diia.Sport Platform: educational training, the introduction of mini-grant competitions;

2. The current system of institutions (both governmental and municipal, and sometimes pseudo-community/controlled) is ineffective in engaging the dominant group of physically inactive people. It is economically justified to directly support projects and initiatives whose main purpose is to engage the population in regular physical activity on a competitive basis through the Active Nation Foundation and local competitions;

3. The Diia.Sport portal, or a separate information platform, is an important tool for ensuring the institutional sustainability of community sports clubs, simplifying reporting, and as a result, increasing their number and quality of services for the population.

Funding

1. Optimize public funding in terms of the cost of engaging one Ukrainian in regular physical activity. Direct state funding and local budgets to support grassroots initiatives on a competitive basis and move away from maintaining municipal and state institutions that engage Ukrainians in recreational sports and regular physical activity;

2. Implementation of infrastructure facilities that provide the most popular types of activity: pedestrian walks along recreational trails, bicycle routes, and running trails;

3. Launching a program of basic state guarantees that would partially compensate children aged 5-17 and socially protected categories of citizens for participating in recreational sports. The primary task is to automate such payments so that the service is available in a few clicks and has double verification of the fact of service provision;

4. Creating conditions for attracting private investment, a tool for philanthropy and increasing the share of direct funding by parents for additional activities for children, and developing a volunteer network - all this is possible through an institution such as a public sports club.

4.3. The state controls everything at all levels, institutions of sports civil society are undemocratic

Currently, the state essentially manages sports and administers the funds allocated for sports, while sports federations are not able to fully assume the functions of developing the respective sport, as well as holding and organizing competitions. The law does not recognize civil society as the basis of sport.

This state of affairs is enshrined in the specialized Law of Ukraine On Physical Culture and Sports and in the regulations adopted on its basis and for its implementation. The legislation assigns unusual and redundant functions to executive authorities, including the organization of sports competitions, and approval of sports rules, and is overloaded with a list of subjects of physical culture and sports, their responsibilities, and organizational support for physical education and sports events. 

It is not lucrative for these immature and often pseudo-democratic public sports organizations to take responsibility for the development of sports, as instead, they can simply receive taxpayer funds to implement their statutory tasks through state and municipal institutions.

Healthy decentralization and democratization of the sports sector are essential components of the successful transformation of Ukrainian society in the post-war years. In the relations between the state and sports, Ukraine follows a “presumption of guilt” principle, i.e. procedures have been created (renting school halls, purchasing uniforms, etc.) that are aimed at bureaucratizing the processes of interaction, producing a pile of certified documents and submitting paper reports, which in most cases preserves a guard of officials who are well-trained in working with documents. The new system should be based on trust, simplification, and automation of processes so that state funding aimed at developing sports and physical activity in Ukraine is accessible even to small grassroots initiatives and stimulates their development.

The transfer from the state to the respective federations of the authority to manage and develop their sports is basic. The approach of sport being a part of civil society, and the state contributing to its development in every possible way is at the heart of the sports system in most European countries. In such federations, sports clubs (non-governmental organizations) are the foundation, and the incentive funding provided by the state allows organizations to compete and attract additional funds and volunteers. The state retains the function of formulating public policy, as well as coordination and monitoring through a specialized directorate and agency. It has to define its request to achieve the public good, determine the available amount of funding, and create equal conditions for the public/private sector and municipal/governmental institutions. This is important, as for 30 years of independence we have remained in the Soviet system of sports, struggling to incorporate elements of the market economy into it.  

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Adoption of the Principles of good governance in sports, which should be mandatory for all organizations applying for state funding for their activities;

2. Development and approval of criteria and conditions for providing funding from the state budget to sports federations by the CMU Resolution, automation of processes;

3. Introducing a number of amendments to the Budget Code of Ukraine to liberalize the mechanisms of financing the sphere of physical culture and sports;

4. Crediting the experiment on the involvement of national sports federations of certain Olympic and non-Olympic sports in the organization and execution of sports events by the Ministry of Youth and Sports, with a full transition to competitive funding and subsequent abolition of the CMU Resolution No. 573 with all amendments;

5. Unification and improvement of the regulatory and legal framework for the activities of children’s and youth sports schools, schools of high sportsmanship, and clubs;

6. Abandonment of state designation and transfer of the right to award any sports grades and titles, as well as the right to certify coaches to the relevant sports federations, with the transition to the EQF for sports personnel, and encouragement of federations to switch to the Long-Term Development in Sport and Physical Activity system;

7. To develop a new effective model of sport development, it is necessary to apply the experience of European countries, especially the neighboring Poland and Estonia, drawing on the basic principles of the White Paper, existing EU programs, the European Dimension in Sport and Work Plan, and the Charter.

Institutional changes 

1. Public administration of sports requires large resource expenditures, both in terms of financial and human resources. The large number of officials in the field of sports at various levels who conduct procurement, form calendar plans, and award titles is proof of this. The European model of sports development, which is reflected in the Council of Europe Resolution, is not characterized by the state managing sports exclusively. It is in the interests of the State of Ukraine to provide institutional support to civil society organizations of physical culture and sports with the gradual complete transfer of the functions of management and organization of sports to the non-governmental sector. This can be an Association or a Confederation of NGOs that will bring together different stakeholders;

2. The core task of the relevant Ministry should remain the formation of policy, state request, and funding criteria while ensuring transparency in the distribution of state funds.

Funding

1. A significant amount of state and local budgets is used to support the work of the staff of state and municipal institutions that manage sports. It would be logical to allow part of the state funding to be directed toward the institutional support of sports organizations and the strengthening of their democracy;

2. Another vestige of the Soviet system is the state contracting of athletes who represent either professional clubs, sports federations, or various agencies. The most suitable option is providing state funding for the training of national team members through the organizations they represent, as well as offering individual scholarships to the most talented athletes;

3. Transition to state-level funding of an exclusive list of federations not based on the principle of them possessing a “national” status, but instead on compliance with the principles of Good Governance in sports.

4.4. Inefficient use of budgetary funds, decision-making not based on objective data and needs, ignoring statistics and analytics

Article 49 of the Constitution of Ukraine enshrines the following provision: “The state shall take care of the development of physical culture and sports,” emphasizing that it is the right of every Ukrainian to enjoy this privilege. In other words, the basic law declares a quite progressive view, but in reality, we observe something quite different: state policy in the field of physical culture and sports in Ukraine follows the Soviet model, where the lion’s share of state funding was focused mainly on the development of high-performance sport and the nurturing of champions. As a result, recreational sports and the engagement of the population in physical activity are underfunded.

Along with the poor popularization of recreational sports, this leads to the fact that physical activity among Ukrainians remains one of the lowest in Europe, and the quality of selection of young athletes suffers. According to the UIF study “How to turn $1 into $15, or the impact of physical activity on the economy of Ukraine”, in 2020, on the brink of the full-scale invasion, funding for recreational sports and physical activity from state and municipal budgets amounted to $2.4-3.7 per Ukrainian, and public health spending amounted to 4.2% of GDP or $170 per Ukrainian. This state of affairs is unacceptable, as it restricts the rights of the majority who do not have access to sports services, while the state spends billions of dollars on winning medals. The UIF and U.Sport experts also estimated the losses of the Ukrainian economy over the past 10 years as a result of the current sports policy and the current lifestyle of Ukrainians:

• USD 73 billion in lost revenue of the GDP (cumulatively for the period 2011-2020)

• The total losses of the Ukrainian budget over the past 10 years amounted to USD 23 billion.

One of the problems is the unavailability of complete, timely, and correct statistics for analysis.  When making government decisions, the authorities do not always have the opportunity to rely on objective data, as they use the statistics from the 1-ФК, 2-ФК, 5-ФК “Report on Physical Culture and Sports” reports, which are, first, difficult to verify, while for some items, the data are missing altogether.

The methodology for calculating the level of physical activity of Ukrainians is different from that used in the Eurobarometer on sports and physical activity surveys. In addition, regular monitoring was not conducted even prior to the full-scale invasion, which made it difficult to compare results and adjust relevant government decisions. 

In the post-war period of limited funding, every hryvnia allocated to sports should be backed by the fulfillment of a certain KPI, either quantitative or qualitative. It is important to introduce a 100% automated distribution of state funding among federations, transparent mechanisms of state financial support for sports through a competitive approach, monitoring the share of state funding in the total amount of investment, and analyzing the results of program implementation. Launching new multiyear funding programs for physical culture and sports at all levels to encourage co-financing and volunteers will help maximize the efficiency of spending. 

It is extremely important to transition to the practice of evidence-based decision-making, with regular monitoring of implemented decisions, evaluation of results, studying the experience of European countries (especially neighboring ones that had similar initial data in the early 90s), and in-depth research before making socially important decisions. An additional tool for obtaining and analyzing baseline data may be the launch of the Diia.Sport app and the use of the DREAM Platform to analyze the cost-effectiveness of restoring sports facilities, their self-sufficiency model, and meeting the real needs of communities.

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Revision and updating of the Standard List of Budget Programs and Performance Indicators for Local Budgets in the Field of Physical Culture and Sports, Order;

2. Conduct a thorough analysis of the impact of the war on the sector. An audit and a complete review of budget programs, with the adoption of a completely new State Program in terms of its ideology and content

3. To regulate the system of Classification of Economic Activities and create a register of institutions/entities providing services in the field of physical culture and sports.

Institutional changes 

1. Institutional reform of sports with a focus on creating at least 20,000 non-profit sports clubs (associations of citizens). The launch of the club system is impossible without simplifying the mechanisms for financing such institutions, tax reporting, and accounting of physical culture and sports entities;

2. Implementation of a monitoring system involving, among others, external auditors, and subsequent correction of existing strategies, programs, and regulations. Public reporting on the results achieved, both at the state level and in local and regional programs, and their compliance with the established state policy;

3. Transfer of public sports infrastructure to communities and cities for management or to business institutions while maintaining public procurement and cooperation within the framework of public-private partnerships.

Funding

1. Abandonment of defaulted state funding and public procurement to meet the needs of civil society organizations of sports and fitness. Transition to supporting capable organizations on a competitive basis in accordance with approved state priorities; 

2. Restoration of the 100% automated public distribution of state funding among federations with transparent criteria for state financial support. Government co-financing or closure of selected programs at the final stage;

3. Introduction of incentives to increase the share of private investment in the sector, as well as to meet the ratio of state funding for high-performance sports and children’s and youth sports, physical activity, and recreational sports at all levels – 50/50;

4. Withdrawal of funding for state programs that do not reflect the state priorities of the Recovery, as well as those that have been recognized as ineffective by an external audit.

4.5. There is no algorithm for determining the priority of restoration/construction of sports infrastructure facilities

The model of sports infrastructure construction in Ukraine which existed until February 2022 is inefficient. This poses a great risk that sports infrastructure will continue to be rebuilt chaotically in the post-war period, without assessing needs and reconsidering the role and objectives of sports in society. In turn, this will lead to an inefficient use of scarce financial resources, particularly international aid. 

Currently, each ministry that oversees sports infrastructure monitors its utilization and development separately, and cities are often not involved in the formation of the demand. 

It is reasonable to start with an inventory/audit of the state of sports infrastructure and develop a Concept for its development and restoration, establishing the most efficient model of operation based on the self-sufficiency of facilities. The main vector of state policy in this domain in the post-war period should be the speedy construction of the sports infrastructure in communities to restore the physical and mental health of Ukrainians: urban infrastructure (running trails and bicycle routes), school gyms and stadiums, typical community centers for local and regional competitions, fitness centers, rehabilitation centers.  The next step is to change government procedures for the effective implementation of the Concept’s programs and projects. 

The reconstruction should begin with the school infrastructure, as this is the place where children can adopt a culture of healthy living. A timely analysis of the damage and the population size in the regions, as well as a developed algorithm for prioritizing the restoration of sports infrastructure facilities, will facilitate a faster and better start. The practice of “patching up holes” without rethinking the function must end.

Regulatory and legal support

1. Develop and adopt the State Concept for the Development of the Sports Infrastructure in Ukraine for the next 15 years, with a clear definition of state priorities for the restoration, the order of reconstruction, sources of investment and donor funds, and evaluation of projects on the DREAM Platform. Harmonization of the State Concept with the recommendations of the updated European 

Sports Charter on the creation of basic infrastructure for everyone, harmonization of Regional Concepts with the State Concept and their regular adjustment;  

2. Improve the mechanism of public-private partnership and concessions in the context of reconstruction by introducing amendments to the relevant laws of Ukraine;

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Develop and adopt the State Concept for the Development of the Sports Infrastructure in Ukraine for the next 15 years, with a clear definition of state priorities for the restoration, the order of reconstruction, sources of investment and donor funds, and evaluation of projects on the DREAM Platform. Harmonization of the State Concept with the recommendations of the updated European 

Sports Charter on the creation of basic infrastructure for everyone, harmonization of Regional Concepts with the State Concept and their regular adjustment;  

2. Improve the mechanism of public-private partnership and concessions in the context of reconstruction by introducing amendments to the relevant laws of Ukraine;

Institutional changes 

1. Within the framework of the Recovery Program, delegate the destroyed state-owned sports infrastructure to communities or private investors through the mechanism of public-private partnerships while preserving the functional purpose; 

2. Simplify the mechanisms of hourly rental of gyms in municipal schools during after-school hours through a single rental portal. Abandon the practice of “free renting” and move towards compensation for the provision of services, although municipal educational institutions must be granted financial autonomy to do so;

3. Transfer all state and municipal sports infrastructure facilities under the supervision of management companies to ensure their break-even operation. Cities can cover the rental of certain hours in accordance with their own priorities and decisions, but equal access for physical culture and sports entities of different forms of ownership must be ensured. Public interests can be safeguarded by introducing supervisory boards in these municipal institutions. This also applies to the infrastructure of taxpayer service centers, children’s and youth sports schools, and schools of high sportsmanship;

4. Provide cities with solutions and examples of typical projects of community centers with sports, education, and cultural components. The solutions can be tailored for communities with different needs and populations, but united into an all-Ukrainian network that will launch children’s competitions and exchanges at a new high-quality level in the future;

5. Educational programs for the staff of new sports facilities.

Funding

1. Encourage private investment and stimulate local budgets to rebuild and create new sports infrastructure for communities. Under the current conditions, large class A infrastructure facilities should be built only under private enterprise;

2. Complete shift from the maintenance of municipal/state infrastructure facilities to the compensation and procurement of leasing services in facilities of various forms of ownership;

3. First and foremost, provide public funding for sports infrastructure that meets the needs of a wide range of citizens for physical activity and recreational sports. Adjust the construction of such facilities in accordance with the projected consumer demand for sports and activities in each particular region, taking into account the geographical and climatic characteristics of the region;

4. Encourage communities to build facilities within the framework of the State Concept for the Development of Sports Infrastructure on a competitive basis;

5. Restoration of sports halls built according to the standards of the USSR and the State Building Code of 1989-1997 and earlier is not financially feasible in present-day Ukraine;

6. In large cities, it appears reasonable to build a community center next to the school, in the form of an independent enterprise, where the school could hold classes in the morning;

7. In the case of construction/reconstruction, the new sports infrastructure should be created taking into account the requirements of international sports federations and maximizing investment.

4.6. Absence of financial and tax incentives (for Ukrainians, employers, investors) to invest in the industry and provide assistance to organizations of physical education and sports 

The state policy in this realm remains one of the constraints for the development of the industry. It would be a mistake to view sports in terms of two opposing vectors: either as a purely social domain or as a for-profit business. Promoting the development of recreational sports and reducing the level of physical inactivity of the population should be viewed as an investment in the future of the country, which has every right to become one of the components of Ukraine’s economic model during the recovery period. It should become one of the tools for converting war trauma into growth.

The state and the employers are, potentially, the key stakeholders in raising the level of physical activity among Ukrainians. Combined with the migration crisis and the population’s demographic aging, the high level of physical inactivity has a profoundly negative cumulative effect, especially coupled with the prospect of a decrease in the number of economically active people, which even before the full-scale invasion totaled 47%, while maintaining a low average healthy life expectancy of 62 years in Ukraine, and the increasing healthcare costs, which amounted to 4% of GDP at the beginning of 2022.

It is also important to encourage investment in sports infrastructure, as much of it has been destroyed, the population’s financial state is catastrophic, and the share of private facilities compared to state and municipal facilities currently stands at only about 10%, so in some regions, only the introduction of additional incentive programs can help change the situation.

It is also important to encourage investment in sports infrastructure, as much of it has been destroyed, the population’s financial state is catastrophic, and the share of private facilities compared to state and municipal facilities currently stands at only about 10%, so in some regions, only the introduction of additional incentive programs can help change the situation.

Local NGOs are often weak and unaware of the variety of fundraising tools, whereas municipal sports schools are wary of raising additional funds legally. There is no mechanism for interest-based philanthropy.

At the same time, the economy of physical activity and recreational health sports is not a separate statistically measurable sector of the Ukrainian economy, but is a component of various adjacent industries and sectors of the economy, while on average, in the EU, its share in the GDP structure amounts to 2.1%.

Post-war recovery will require huge investments, including capital investments, and one of the government’s tasks is to find new sources of funding. Mechanisms of public-private partnerships, concessions, and privatization of state-owned enterprises in need of restoration, with preservation of the sports function, should be introduced. It will be important to introduce an instrument of interest-based philanthropy and a set of financial incentives to partially exempt employers from taxes if they encourage their employees to engage in sports and to encourage Ukrainians to support organizations where their children or themselves are doing sports. 

The introduction of insurance medicine will also encourage insurance companies to encourage their customers to lead healthier lifestyles and reduce their physical inactivity to minimize insurance payments. Encouraging citizens to take up sports, regular physical activity and a healthy lifestyle will significantly reduce the burden on the public healthcare system. 

Volunteering is one of the pillars of sport, as it helps to develop civil society and grassroots initiatives, nurtures proactive citizens with a strong sense of solidarity and empathy, and saves a substantial amount of money. The economic impact of such activities is grossly underestimated in Ukraine. Following the end of the war, a large number of Ukrainians will continue to engage in volunteer work, and the sports sector can take advantage of this and attract more volunteers while giving those who want to help the opportunity to pursue their passion for sports in this role.

Regulatory and legal framework

1. Adoption of the Law on Interest-Based Philanthropy;

2. Finalize the Law of Ukraine On Public-Private Partnership;

3. Introduction of other tax incentives.

Institutional changes 

1. Introduce educational programs on business opportunities for civic organizations and on obtaining sponsorship from legal entities, as well as tools for recruiting volunteers to join sports organizations;

2. An important factor of significant relevance is Ukraine’s transition to insurance medicine;

3. Indirect stimulation of investments in the sports infrastructure of communities (especially those affected by military aggression) through the adoption of local partnership recovery programs: granting land for such facilities, establishing communications, co-financing physical culture and sports services for the population;

4. To improve the conditions of the educational process, provide an opportunity to involve private and municipal infrastructure facilities for PE lessons via lease;

Funding

1. Centralized accumulation of funds by the state and then their redistribution as a sports manager may not always serve as the most effective mechanism. Enabling citizens to financially support sports and fitness organizations through the mechanism of interest-based philanthropy will increase the efficiency of allocating such funds;

2. Another effective mechanism is providing tax incentives for employers to use a certain percentage of the company’s financial resources to encourage employees’ engagement in recreational sports.

Communication of reforms to society

Reforms should be communicated to four different groups of stakeholders. These groups are formed taking into account two factors: the presence or absence of influence, and the gain or loss of benefits.

The full list of stakeholders includes about 35 different groups and entities. The greatest attention should be paid to the group that has great influence but is likely to suffer losses from the implementation of the reform. The main task of the communication with this group is to find out their positions and attitudes towards the changes and the motivation for maintaining the status quo, as well as their potential opposition to the reform. According to the preliminary data, the main opponents of the reform are the Ministry of Youth and Sports, state and municipal enterprises, coaches of national teams, children’s coaches, former Olympians, the National Olympic Committee of Ukraine, the National Sports Committee for the Disabled of Ukraine, and some executive bodies within city councils. 

The main aspects that shape the opponents’ counteractions are the economic component (non-transparent access to resources and ignoring sports as one of the powerful drivers of the state economy), factors of the current state goals in sports aimed exclusively at the successful performance of Ukrainian athletes at the international level, low awareness of citizens about the health effects of regular physical activity, and ineffective spending of state and municipal funds.

At the state level, communications should contribute to changes in long-term goals and state priorities, and at the public level, they should raise public awareness of the importance of recreational sports in order to boost the demand for exercise.

When defining key communication messages as well as a communication plan for the reform, it appears reasonable to follow the recommendations of the Revised European Sports Charter. If public communication is ahead of the curve in explaining all the benefits that Ukrainians will receive from the implementation of the reform, it will significantly accelerate the transformation period, as its main goal is to remove artificial restrictions that hinder the development of the sector and limit the accessibility of recreational sports to the general public.

Steps and stages of change

The realm of sports, being an integral part of the public life in a country at war and potentially facing a permanent threat in the future, can only exist in close connection with the economy and the circumstances in place as of 2023. That is why the role of sports, physical culture, regular physical activity, recreational sports, and adaptive sports training for veterans and people with disabilities should become part of the future economic model of the state and the country’s defense capacity, as well as help overcome the crisis, unite society, and strengthen the country’s socio-economic potential. Every hryvnia spent on the development of sports must be justified in terms of its positive impact on Ukrainian society and the country’s recovery. A fundamental shift from directing the vast majority of public funding towards preparing for and participating in international competitions needs to occur, focusing on solving domestic problems and recognizing the formation of a (physically and mentally) healthy nation as a public policy priority.

Therefore, the first step towards change should be the public recognition of the core problems affecting the industry, a relinquishment of ad hoc changes, and a public declaration of the need for a sectoral reform that would set out the goals and expected changes in social relations.

The concept of sectoral reform proposed by civil society should become the basis for devising a set of decisions, laws, and bylaws approved by representatives of local governments, other central executive authorities, and the wider public. The new approach should be based on opening up opportunities for each individual citizen while meeting the requirements of the key sectoral documents of the European Union and the Council of Europe. In order to rapidly catch up with the world’s leaders, Ukraine should focus on introducing new technologies, using AI to analyze data, stimulating viable initiatives and startups, and minimizing administration resources.

Unfortunately, it is not enough to adopt one law or change a few procedures to successfully reform the entire sports sector. This is a multifaceted issue that requires a consolidation of the competencies among the state, the public sector, business, the IT community, and experts in related fields.

• Preparatory stage (2023-2024)

1. Formation of a group of specialists who will ensure the audit, development, monitoring, and implementation of the package of changes. Prior experience proves that modifications and ad hoc adjustments to the legislation cannot deliver the necessary positive dynamics, therefore only a comprehensive approach can solve the problem. In addition, the current system is not capable of changing itself, which is why the expert group can be created under the CMU Reforms Office or as an independent expert community that will have the authority and capacity to unite the best specialists, engage external consulting companies, secure sustainable funding and consult with international partners for the sake of the successful reform implementation, without any interference from local lobbying groups.

2. Defining the role of sport and physical activity in the overall Recovery Program, with a review of key budget programs that will help accelerate the country’s sustainable economic growth, the physical and mental recovery of Ukrainians, and the democratization of society.

3. Conducting an audit of the compliance of legislation to the reform objectives, identifying problem areas and baselines. 

4. Implementation of changes will require significant human resources at various levels, so it is necessary to ensure the training of specialists who will have the appropriate competencies and insight into new approaches, will be involved in the work and coordination of the newly founded or reformed state institutions, local departments, and will also serve as members of the governing bodies within public sports and fitness associations and their associations.

5. The successful execution of the reform depends directly on the integration of the package of changes into the economic model of post-war Ukraine, the adaptation of existing state programs, as well as the clear prioritization of the state request in the field of elite sports, and the promotion of physical activity and recreational sports.

6. An awareness-raising campaign and advocacy for change across Ukrainian society is an integral part of the reform. Changes are introduced in the interests of the entire society, not individual groups. Therefore, it is important to show and explain what positive changes will take place for each community and each individual citizen, what their participation or place in the newly created ecosystem can be, and how they can use the new services.

• The main stage (2024-2026)

At this stage, it is important to ensure the simultaneous coordinated implementation of changes at different levels.

• Development of a comprehensive gradual Reform Plan and Financial Plan as part of the Recovery Program, with estimates of funding needs, timelines, responsible parties, and key indicators.
  Develop and adopt a package of amendments to Ukrainian laws, and bylaws to ensure the implementation of the reform and the harmonization of legislation with the EU standards and requirements. This legislative package will replace the current Law of Ukraine On Physical Culture and Sports and aims to ensure gradual implementation and unification of physical culture and sports entities and their legal relations, reduce state regulation, and strengthen the role of civil society in sports governance, as well as determine the state’s mandate in regulating certain aspects of professional sports required by international directives and agreements.

• Update targeted programs to ensure a complete division of state policy into recreational health sports with subsidies from local budgets to compensate for the provision of services to the population, as well as the creation of infrastructure for healthy activities, versus elite sports, where a competitive approach to state funding and targeted support for talent should be introduced.

• Completion of the reform of the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Ukraine and other state institutions that manage sports. Development of the relevant new infrastructure that will ensure the gradual implementation of the reform and strengthen the capacity of the state to implement the planned steps:

• Institutional infrastructure: it is important to complete the establishment of the relevant Directorates that will perform policy-making functions in the relevant Ministry (Directorate for the Development of Recreational Sports and Physical Health), as well as the establishment of the Active Nation Foundation, which will ensure the implementation of state policy by financing relevant programs in cooperation with civil society institutions and municipalities, as well as provide institutional support to the public sports sector;

• Digital infrastructure: launching Diia.Sport as the basis for the entire sectoral reform (to enable data collection, unification of registers, leasing of infrastructure, automation of public funding, launching educational programs, monitoring, and public reporting);

• Economic infrastructure: complete withdrawal from state funding of institutions and activities and a shift towards incentivizing through the introduction of compensations for the provision of physical culture and sports services to the population, co-financing of projects and programs within the approved Recovery priorities. Introducing other incentives for the development of the sports infrastructure at the cost of private investors, as well as encouraging the population to engage in regular recreational sports and be physically active.

• The final stage (2026-2030)

Ukraine’s transition to the European model of sports development, based on the core principles of sports development – autonomy and self-governance, – with democratic public sports clubs as the backbone of the respective sports federations. Complete abolition of state institutions and enterprises that currently manage sports, with the assignment of infrastructure assets to territorial municipalities, civil society organizations or private investors, while maintaining the sports function (if necessary). Conversion of municipal property leases to an online booking system with automatic distribution of public funding in accordance with the criteria and competitive conditions.

A harmonious ecosystem with the implementation of the equivalent vectors of the state policy: ensuring mass involvement in regular physical activity and high-quality training of Ukrainian pro athletes. Continuous monitoring of changes and correction of state policy is due at all stages.

• Qualitative criteria for assessing the success/failure of reform implementation in the realm of physical culture and sports (i.e., how the adopted laws, new tools, and programs affect the quality of life of every Ukrainian and the development of physical culture and sports actors):

1. To what extent have the adopted laws and bylaws changed the current status quo and positively influenced the system of social relations?

2. The degree of democratization and decentralization of decision-making in the Ukrainian sport. 

3. How citizens perceive the concern of local authorities and the state for their physical well-being.

4. Accessibility of classes for different age groups and people with disabilities.

5. Equality in the access to the sports infrastructure for physical culture and sports entities of different forms of ownership.

6. The level of consciousness in the citizens’ attitude towards their physical fitness.

7. Increase in the share of private investment compared to public funding.

8. Implementation of international directives and obligations and harmonization of Ukrainian laws and other legal acts with the acquis communautaire.

• Quantitative criteria for assessing the success/failure of reform implementation in the realm of physical culture and sports (annual monitoring of indicators and adjustment of state policy):

1. Increase in the number of citizens interested in sports, engaged in recreational sports and regular physical activity, and involved as volunteers in the sector (it is important to conduct a baseline measurement in the post-war period at the stage of developing a comprehensive Reform Plan and introduce regular monitoring of key indicators). 

2. Measurement of the level of physical activity among the population – such research should be conducted within the framework of the Eurobarometer, as well as through individual monitoring of target groups with fitness trackers. The expected sufficient level of physical activity across the population as of 2030 should constitute up to 50% of the adult population of Ukraine aged 18+.

3. Reducing the percentage of the physically inactive population down to 15% in 2030, in accordance with the WHO recommendations.

4. Separate monitoring of the level of children’s involvement in recreational health sports, which forms sustainable positive habits for life – 60% of children aged 5-17 by 2030.

5. The level of the economically active population – up to 55% in 2030.

6. Average life expectancy of Ukrainians – 77 years in 2030.

7. Average healthy life expectancy among Ukrainians – 70 years. 

8. Growth in the share of sports, physical activity, and related industries in the country’s GDP – 3% by 2030.

9. Increase in the number of sports clubs of various forms of ownership – 20,000 functioning clubs by 2030.

10. The ratio between the state’s funding for elite sports and children’s and youth sports and the funding of physical activity and recreational sports at all levels – 50/50 starting from 2024.

11. The number of sports federations that meet the principles of Good Governance – 100% of the organizations receiving public funding starting in 2024.

12. Funding for recreational sports and physical activity of Ukrainians – 100 Euros per person in 2030.

13. 30% of sports infrastructure is privately owned.

14. 100% of the newly built sports infrastructure within the framework of the Recovery is self-sustaining.

5. RED LINES WHICH  CANNOT BE CROSSED IN THE YOUTH AND SPORTS POLICY

The misconception that the issues of youth or sport and physical activity are yet again “untimely” is one of the challenges that may arise in post-war Ukraine. For this reason, the authors of this document have devoted much attention to justifying how important it is to implement fundamental changes as soon as possible, clarifying their ideological basis, and the social and economic impact they will have in general. Failure to fully utilize these tools of democratization, rehabilitation, and unification of the society through high-quality public youth work and mass sports can lead to significant economic losses and the fragmentation of Ukrainian society.

The greatest risk is the denial of the existing problems and the stagnation of the youth and sports sectors, and as a result, the conservation of the current state policy. The functioning of youth organizations and sports federations cannot remain overregulated and determined by the Ministry. Preserving the state’s monopoly on the implementation of youth policy and sports, a false system of priorities (focusing primarily on performance rather than health and mass participation), and Soviet practices will not serve as an incentive for the development of the public sector, which will lead to further conservation of problems and make it impossible to increase the involvement of Ukrainians in mass sports and youth work aimed at reaching the majority of young people.

In addition, the need to separate policy-making and implementation functions between different executive bodies, delegate powers to the democratic civil society, and build partnerships between the government and the public remains crucial.

The principle of “no decision on youth without youth” cannot be ignored. Currently, civil society has an insufficient influence on youth and sports policy-making, there is no monitoring of managerial decisions or any in-depth research (which is, at best, attempted formally), and in many cases, decisions are made under the influence of lobby groups.

Under no circumstances can the reforms launched be allowed to stop. As with other domains, there have been attempts to introduce ad hoc changes in youth policy and sports over the years, some innovations have been sabotaged by implementers or stopped due to a change of government, but a comprehensive reform that would improve the lives of the majority of Ukrainians has never been undertaken. Supporters of the existing system use those attempts as examples of failed reforms and, therefore, argue that this or that domain does not need to be reformed. However, it is the short cycle and the declarative nature of public policy changes, as well as the lack of interest in the transformation of the main beneficiaries of the current system, that is the main reason for the ongoing stagnation. In order to achieve the set targets, it is necessary to introduce a set of interrelated changes, both legislatively and by implementing reform laws. This will take time and will face resistance from some of the elite. However, changes in state policy in the realm of youth and sports will have a positive impact on the lives of every Ukrainian. Another challenge may lie in the focus on election expectations for 2024-2025 and the attempt to achieve an immediate effect for the electorate rather than to induce profound changes in society.

The same can be said about the risk that people who do not understand the essence of these processes (due to a personal lack of experience in participating in the real civil society sector) will be engaged in reforming the sector. Impermissible is the imitation of the reform by people who declare the need for change only for the sake of keeping up with popular social sentiment in order to stay in office – this will lead to catastrophic mistakes and a wasted chance for transformation.

Some fear that fundamental structural changes may have an adverse effect on the involvement of children currently enrolled in youth sports schools, especially in smaller communities. We, therefore, emphasize the importance of implementing a package of comprehensive solutions that will not deteriorate the situation but rather improve the quality of sports services in such institutions and significantly expand opportunities for every Ukrainian.

It is necessary to prevent the dissolution of grassroots sports within the structure of high-performance sports, where it will be managed by people who are not interested in its success. This ties in with the youth policy of focusing on supporting the 1-2% of young people who “shine” with their leadership skills or other talents. This causes preservation of the artificially created partiality of the state to high-performance sports / “youth leaders” with a limited number of beneficiaries, to the detriment of involving more people in mass sports and physical activity / public youth work, of supporting grassroots initiatives and developing the public sector. This happens due to the lobbying of big sports elites and the promotion of the “chosen” young people within the parliamentary corps and the executive branch at all levels, posing one of the main threats to Ukraine’s further democratization.

It is necessary to conduct a “sports / youth policy lustration” (by compiling a public list of individuals and structures of the “civil society” that contributed to the usurpation of power by Viktor Yanukovych and the Russian Federation’s attack on Ukraine, as well as cooperated with the aggressor state and its proxies in Ukraine, and were involved in corruption schemes). Without this lustration, there is a constant threat of a rollback in the changes implemented, as was the case in previous years. The state of Ukraine and its strong civil society cannot cooperate with and fund such organizations, and they, in turn, cannot participate in the transformation of Ukrainian sports and youth policy. In addition, sports organizations tend to become places of whitewashing for dubious politicians, while the leaders of the federations often monopolize power within them, which unfortunately discredits the entire industry. The nepotism practices, the involvement of current MPs, officials, and ministers in leadership positions in sports or youth organizations (including the practice of establishing a covert control through henchmen) are a direct reflection of Russian social and political patterns and have nothing to do with professional, honest management. It is important to prevent further ignoring or compromising of anything that goes beyond the established system of youth policy or sports. Especially in those categories where democratization and the real inclusion of the civil sector are concerned. The current system operates with ready-made solutions that profit a long-formed circle of beneficiaries, both at the central and local levels. In recent years, all the available mechanisms of civic participation that could help shape change have been failing to function properly. This issue is not just a matter of youth policy or sports; it is a negative trend in the entire Ukraine.

One could model an ideal reform matrix, optimize the state apparatus, create new institutions, propose models of solutions, and amend legislation and a number of regulations, but bureaucracy could undermine all of the good initiatives, and procedures would become so complicated that only a limited number of people would be able to use them. All of the actors, subjects, indicators, competitions, and formulas for allocating budget funds should be digitized and made public, procedures should be streamlined, and decisions should be made on the basis of verified data.

Infrastructure for the majority of citizens should become a priority for the state and local governments. Overly ambitious, expensive projects to build Class A sports facilities in the first years after the war will deplete the already limited resources of a post-war country and spawn new corruption schemes. Moreover, due to the low rate of people’s involvement in sports, the severe impoverishment of the population, and the demographic crisis caused by the war, such expensive facilities risk being unprofitable and underutilized.

Although funding is not the main criterion for the success of implementing changes in the domains of youth policy and sports, the allocation of budget funds on a residual basis and their irrational use will inevitably lead to the failure to reach the expected results and a sustainable economic effect. The KPIs set by civil society require the adoption of a set of solutions that demand appropriate budgeting and a guarantee of safe implementation.