Research Terms of Reference - Profiles and Vulnerabilities of People Displaced Through Own Means (outside organised evacuation mechanisms) - UKR2603, Ukraine (March 2026, V1)

Country: Ukraine Source: REACH Initiative Please refer to the attached file. 2. Rationale 2.1 Background Since the escalation of the Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has experienced one of the largest internal displacement crises in Europe. As of December 2025, approximately 3.7 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) resided in the country. 1 Displacement flows primarily originate from eastern and southern oblasts – notably Donetska, Kharkivska, Zaporizhzhska, Sumska, Khersonska and Luhanska – the residents of these regions continuously suffer from being near the front line and the occupation of territories2,3,4 Following the escalation, the state provided legal grounds for evacuation and introduced coordination mechanisms for evacuation measures and response to mass population movement, defined responsibilities across national and local authorities, NGOs, initiatives and volunteers. The government also established classification systems territories affected by hostilities and temporary occupation to guide evacuation planning and response. While a formal evacuation system is in place, 6 it primarily regulates assisted evacuation, including organised transport, humanitarian corridors, and relocation to transit centres under declared mandatory evacuation orders. As such, it largely captures individuals who are visible to state and humanitarian actors through their engagement with organised mechanisms and service provision. At the same time, available evidence indicates that most civilians did not leave through assisted evacuation. IOM General Population Survey found, that 72% of displaced population. 7 This suggests that a substantial proportion of those evacuating may remain outside formal evacuation channels and, consequently, be less visible to institutional response systems. While it is possible that some individuals relying on self-organised evacuation do not require external assistance, this remains an untested assumption. Limited evidence exists to determine whether their reliance on personal resources reflects sufficient coping capacity, temporary self-reliance, or unmet protection and assistance needs that remain unreported. Thus, gaps in understanding of movement patterns and motivations of those people displaced by their own means have important protection implications, especially because of the connection between displacement and vulnerability: 37% of IDP households include people with disabilities, 56% include chronically ill members, and 42% include children.8 Family separation affects up to 42% of households from front-line raions. Housing remains the most persistent unmet need, reported by up to 44% of respondents, while financial and service access gaps remain widespread.9 Vulnerability is further shaped by mobility constraints: older people, people with disabilities, and low-income households face greater barriers to movement.

Read More