The Revolution of Dignity in 2013–2014 not only consolidated NUMO’s core member organizations but also provided them with the impetus to eliminate postcolonial approaches in youth work in Ukraine and to shape modern European youth policy and youth work in Ukrainian communities. From 2015 to 2019, this work by NUMO’s core member organizations was carried out within the framework of the Youth Group of the “Reanimation Package of Reforms” (RPR). It was then that the Roadmap for Reforming Youth Policy was developed, and the first steps were taken toward its implementation: creating a network of youth centres and youth councils, launching training for youth workers, and shaping policies on Ukrainian national and civic identity.

After nearly a decade of efforts, we succeeded in building a basic model for community-based youth work, as well as passing key legislation on youth policy and the policy of fostering Ukrainian national and civic identity. All-Ukrainian youth organizations that were forged in the crucible of the Revolution of Dignity and gained experience through constructive cooperation within the RPR established their own association in 2019: NUMO. Despite all the efforts of NUMO, many youth councils, and youth centres, unfortunately, it has not yet been possible to establish effective tools in Ukraine for implementing national-level youth policy—policies capable of improving the quality of youth work in communities. Most communities in Ukraine still lack youth organizations, youth councils, or youth centers—that is, the basic infrastructure necessary for youth work.

In 2023—one year after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine—a group of NUMO experts, together with the School of Political Analysis at NaUKMA and the RPR, participated in the development of “Vision for Ukraine: Reforming and Restoring the Social and Humanitarian Sphere by 2050.” We developed 12 strategic priorities designed to guide the next phase of youth policy and youth work development in Ukraine. These steps build on existing achievements in the youth sector following the Revolution of Dignity. After these strategic points are discussed and refined by member organizations and partner organizations, NUMO will strive for the following changes in youth policy and youth work in Ukraine over the next decade:

1. Youth policy must be separated from sports and elevated to the level of a cross-sectoral government initiative, for example, through the position of a government commissioner. At the same time, the approach must shift from funding youth initiatives within the framework of a single specialized ministry (department, division) to providing resource support for youth and youth work across all sectors. After all, youth are unique in that their interests must be reflected in every ministry; therefore, cross-sectoral and inter-ministerial cooperation is needed to create and fund youth programs in each of the ministries.
2. It is important to clearly separate the functions of youth policy formulation and the administration (implementation) of youth work. The bodies that formulate youth policy oversee its implementation by establishing independent supervisory boards for administrative structures (youth centres, foundations, etc.) that carry out youth work. Supervisory boards are formed by the founders, not by administrative bodies. Supervisory boards must include youth representatives. This approach will enable high-quality cooperation with civil society and the introduction of transparent and independent competitions to support youth initiatives—primarily the development of organizational capacities of public youth organizations and the infrastructure for youth work.
3. Youth policy is designed to organize high-quality youth work in communities—maximizing opportunities for self-realization for the majority of young people in communities. In practice, this means that youth policy in the community is shaped by the youth council in collaboration with the local government. It is important that civil society be involved in monitoring the implementation of such policies, for example through participation in a youth centre’s supervisory board. Within local government executive bodies, departments or specialists responsible for youth affairs should provide technical support for local youth policy rather than directly managing youth work. In other words, there is no de facto narrowing of youth policy and youth work to the scope of the sector within which they are situated in the executive branch of local government.
4. In each community, youth policy is analysed, developed, and coordinated by a youth council established by the relevant local self-government body (not by the head, mayor, or executive committee, but specifically by the council). Youth councils are stipulated in community charters and serve as the primary consultative and advisory bodies for local self-government regarding the development and implementation of youth policy. At the national and regional levels, there are ongoing programs for training and supporting youth councils, including school self-government bodies and student self-government bodies in larger cities.
5. The implementer of youth policy at the community level is the municipal youth centre—a nonprofit organization that also develops a network of youth spaces (in schools, libraries, after-school programs, sports and music schools, as well as on private property or in facilities operated by religious organizations recognized by the state or the community), reaching more than 50% of the community’s youth each month. The youth centre is not only a safe space for young people, especially adolescents, with free access to heating, electricity, and the internet. It is also a space suitable for organizing and implementing volunteer projects within the community. These centres and spaces also support the development of local branches of nationwide youth civil society organizations and serve as information hubs on opportunities available to young people at the community, regional, national, and EU levels.
6. Every municipal youth centre has a public and transparent supervisory board formed according to a 50–50 principle adapted to Ukrainian realities. Half of its members are elected by the youth council, and the other half by the local self-government body. At the same time, at least one-third of the supervisory board members are representatives of civil society, approved jointly by both the youth council and the local self-government body. The supervisory board is provided for in the bylaws of the youth centre and is authorized to define and support the strategy for the development of youth work in the community, oversee the activities of the youth centre and community youth spaces, exercise financial oversight of the centre, nominate candidates for the position of centre director to the local self-government body, and initiate the removal of the director from office. Thus, the supervisory board of a municipal youth centre becomes the primary collegial body responsible for the practical development and promotion of youth work at the community level, in line with the relevant approach of the Council of Europe.
7. Youth initiatives and projects benefit from a streamlined procedure for obtaining financial support from communities, regions, and the state. This includes support for hosting volunteer groups in communities and organizing educational visits to other communities within the region, other regions of Ukraine, and abroad (primarily to the EU, the U.S., and Canada). At least 30% of a community’s youth have experience collaborating with young people from other regions and countries, understand the benefits of their community’s development, and are integrated into the process of making key decisions in their community. Young people in communities also have the opportunity to influence—and do influence—decision-making regarding youth at the regional, national, and international levels.
8. Youth work in communities, reaching the majority of young people aged 12–24, is carried out by qualified youth leaders and staff who have not only completed relevant training but also continuously work to improve the quality of their educational activities. These efforts are strongly supported by both the state and local communities. Most communities have at least two Plast units—the Ukrainian Scouting organization (as part of the implementation of the state strategy to support the Plast movement)—as well as several branches of other national youth organizations that foster Ukrainian national and civic identity among young people.
9. Student self-governance bodies in Ukraine have established themselves as full-fledged legal entities—autonomous, financially sustainable, and socially responsible institutions of student representation. They operate as legal entities, implement their own development policies, participate in grant and state programs, attract additional resources, and manage finances openly and accountably. Student self-governance bodies have the capacity to support and develop student spaces, student clubs, and initiatives operating within their educational institutions. They enjoy the trust of their communities and are guaranteed a share of their educational institutions’ budgets. They have become equal partners of higher education institution administrations in making decisions concerning students, have the right to legal protection of their interests, and play a vital role in fostering university democracy, a culture of integrity, and civic engagement among young people.
10. Integrity-driven all-Ukrainian youth organizations at the national level, and local youth organizations at the community level, have the opportunity to receive the basic resources necessary for institutional establishment and development (premises, organizational and institutional support for staff teams, and funding for project activities, with 10–20% allocated for administrative support of those projects). Their mission is to reach the majority of young people in communities through collective activities on a monthly basis. Such organizations are transparent and accountable to society and their communities regarding all allocated resources, and they undergo an annual financial audit supported by state or community funding, as appropriate. Experience gained through participation in democratic youth organizations and school and student self-governance bodies serves as the primary school of civic education in Ukraine, rather than mandatory theoretical lessons taught by proponents of totalitarian communist values who lack real-world experience in civic life or participation in democratic civic organizations.
11. Youth councils, centres, and organizations operate openly and transparently. Communities invest in youth work in cooperation with external partners, including businesses, donors, and patrons. At least half of the funding is provided by the community itself. The state and communities ensure a minimum European level of investment in youth work—at least 25 euros per young person per year (excluding funding for education, culture, sports, and social support).
12. All the policies listed above are legally and normatively extended to the entire Ukrainian diaspora as well. They encourage the creation of youth councils within Ukrainian diaspora communities; support existing youth councils and the establishment of new ones (with funding from local communities); support Ukrainian student organizations at universities around the world; and support community-based youth organizations (primarily Plast and the Ukrainian Youth Association). The mobility of Ukrainian youth in the diaspora must also be supported through negotiations with relevant governments regarding financial contributions, but in the opposite direction—that is, through visits to their homeland.

Moscow’s imperialism is waging a war aimed at the total destruction of Ukrainian national and civic identity, including through agent networks operating within Ukraine at all levels. In light of this, NUMO and its partner organizations will cooperate in achieving the goals of this Declaration only with reputable civil society organizations, representatives of state authorities, and local self-government bodies that share the Union’s values. Both in Ukraine and abroad, NUMO and its partner organizations avoid cooperation and interaction with organizations and networks affiliated with Moscow imperialism and its agents, as well as with pseudo-civil society organizations that contradict the fundamental principles of youth participation.

NUMO acknowledges and accepts the fact that nearly half of the world’s young Ukrainians already reside outside the territories controlled by Ukraine. NUMO does not seek to shape policies aimed at “bringing young Ukrainians back” from abroad. Instead, it believes that all available resources should be focused on supporting young people who remain in Ukraine, as well as on preserving and strengthening the Ukrainian national identity of young people who were forced to leave Ukraine or were born into the circumstances of their families’ forced emigration. Only when young people in Ukraine have institutionalized opportunities to realize their social potential in their own country can we move toward policies that encourage stronger social ties between young Ukrainians abroad and their homeland.