Fellowship Programme
Country
Area of Interest
Topic
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Armenia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
For Diana Daiub, co-founder and director of Support Ukraine Now, the Russian invasion of Ukraine wasn’t just a national crisis – it was deeply personal. As a long-time advocate for civil society, she knew that Ukraine’s civil society organisations (CSOs) would play a vital role in supporting those most affected by the war. But there was a challenge: how could these organisations, many already stretched thin, access the expertise they needed to tackle the growing demands?
Diana saw an opportunity in the global outpouring of support for Ukraine. Many people wanted to help, but logistics were difficult—how could international volunteers lend their skills to local organisations that were struggling with everything from project management to language training? This is when Diana’s idea was born: a platform that could connect international volunteers with Ukrainian civil society organisations, giving these organisations the support they needed while allowing people worldwide to contribute meaningfully to Ukraine’s future.
“I realised that the world was ready to help, but the challenge was creating a system that made it easy for volunteers and organisations to connect. That’s how the idea for Volunteer4Ukraine was born.”
Diana applied for the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Fellowship because she knew she needed support to turn her idea into reality. Through her fellowship, Diana developed Volunteer4Ukraine, an online platform that uses no-code tools to match CSOs with international volunteers. The platform allows CSOs to register and share their needs—whether it’s for help with fundraising, teaching English, or financial management. On the other side, volunteers from around the globe sign up and are matched with opportunities based on their skills.
“Before the fellowship, we had a form collecting contacts of potential volunteers, but we didn’t have the resources to match them with CSOs. The fellowship gave me the tools and connections to develop and launch the project, and we’re already seeing the impact.”
Over 2,600 visitors checked out the Volueert4Ukraine platform, with 24 CSOs and 39 volunteers officially registered within the first 3 months of the platform work. These volunteers come from countries like the US, UK, Germany, Switzerland, and South Africa, bringing a variety of skills from language teaching to strategic planning. The system identified 255 matches between CSOs and volunteers and made the first automated introductions, with five confirmed collaborations already underway.
One of the early successes includes volunteers from the UK and the US working with Smart Osvita, a Kyiv-based organisation, to teach English to children affected by the war. At the same time, Skhidnyi Menti, another CSO, has started working with volunteers from Germany and Switzerland to manage projects and finances. These collaborations show how international volunteers can fill critical gaps and help CSOs do more for their communities.
“The beauty of this project is that it’s not just about technical skills—it’s about building connections. These collaborations are not just helping CSOs meet their needs; they’re bringing people together across borders.”
Looking ahead, Diana is optimistic about the future of Volunteer4Ukraine. The platform is fully automated and can run with minimal supervision. As the war continues and the needs of Ukrainian CSOs grow, this digital tool will remain an important resource for hundreds of organisations. Diana plans to seek additional funding to keep the platform running long-term, ensuring that more CSOs can benefit from international expertise.
“Volunteer4Ukraine has shown that global cooperation can make a real difference. As long as Ukrainian CSOs need support, we’ll keep building these bridges.”
| Country | Ukraine |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Georgia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Armenia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Georgia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Georgia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Armenia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Belarus |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Ukraine |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |
Updates coming soon!
| Country | Georgia |
| The scope of | |
| Type of solution | |
| The technology used | |
| The budget development decisions | 0 |