MSI LEP Final Report by MSI Worldwide

THE ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND LEGAL EMPOWERMENT PROJECT IN UKRAINE FINAL REPORT: MAY 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; JUNE 15, 2014

JUNE 10, 2014

t was preparedThis by

publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Management Systems International.

THE ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND LEGAL EMPOWERMENT PROJECT IN UKRAINE FINAL REPORT: MAY 5, 2010 – JUNE 15, 2014

Corporate Offices 200 12th Street South Arlington, VA 22202

Contracted under USAID Cooperative Agreement No. AID-121-A-00-10-00704-00 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine

DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. fffffffffffffffffffffff

Executing agency:

Management Systems International (MSI)

Project partner agencies (or national counterparts):

Ukrainian Authorities: •

Ministry of Justice of Ukraine; o

•

Local Government Bodies in select oblasts; o

•

Chief Departments of Justice and public legal aid offices in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Kharkiv, IvanoFrankivsk, Lviv, Donetsk, Khmelnytskiy, Odessa, Zakarpattya, Zaporizhzhia, Volyn, Dnipropetrovsk, Chernivtsi Oblasts

Courts of appeals of select oblasts: Ivano-Frankivsk, Donetsk, Uzhhorod, Lutsk, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipropetrovsk, Chernivsti.

Members of the Verkhovna Rada; o

Parliamentary Committee on Agrarian Policy and Land Resources; Parliamentary Committee on Pensioners, Veterans and the Disabled; Ministry of Health of Ukraine, Health Departments at Oblast State Administrations; State Employment Inspection of Ukraine, regional branches of State Employment Inspection in select 12 oblasts; State Agency for Land Resources of Ukraine; oblast and district employment centers.

National NGOs: •

Ukrainian Coalition for Legal Aid

•

Volyn Regional Organization of the Union of Lawyers of Ukraine;

•

Agency for Private Initiative Development;

•

Foundation for Medical Law and Bioethics of Ukraine.

Legal Clinics: •

Legal Clinic at Lviv Ivan Franko National University;

•

Legal Clinic at Kyiv-Mohyla National University;

•

Pro Bono Legal Clinic of Volodymyr Dal’ East-Ukrainian National University;

•

Legal Clinic at Khmelnytskiy University of Management and Law;

•

Dovira Legal Clinic at Sumy National Agrarian University;

•

Legal Clinic at Odessa Law Academy;

•

Legal Clinic Experimental Training Laboratory at Law School of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy National University;

•

Legal Clinic at Center for Practical Studies at Economy and Law 2

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

School of Donetsk National University; •

Femida Legal Clinic at Ukraina Lutsk Institute for Human Development;

•

Ad Astra Legal Clinic at Lesia Ukrainka Volyn National University;

•

Legal Clinic at the Employment Law and Social protection Law Chair at Chernihiv State Technological University;kj;

•

Legal Clinic at Volyn Vyacheslav Lypynskiy Interregional Academy for Personnel Management;

•

Legal Clinic at Law Institute at Prykarpattya Vasyl Stefanyk National University;

•

Legal Consulting Center Legal Clinic at law School of Bila Tserkva National University;

•

Justice Irpin Legal Clinic Practical Training Center of the National University for State Tax Service of Ukraine;

•

Training Center for legal Clinical Education of the Training and Scientific Institute for National Academy of the Interior.

Institute

28 Private law firms (see annex 1 for full list) Geographical coverage:

Ukraine

Project management site:

LEP office, 3, Bankova St., office 33, 01024, Kyiv, Ukraine

Target group(s):

•

Citizens in need of legal services

•

Legal advocacy NGOs

•

Students legal clinics

•

Law firms

•

Ukrainian authorities

Project period:

May 5, 2010 to June 15, 2014

3 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................ 4 List of Acronyms................................................................................................................................................. 6 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Program Activities .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Objective 1: Strengthen the capacity of legal advocacy organizations to effectively represent the interests of citizens. ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Activity 1(a): Developing demand-driven technical training for partner organizations on specialized topics including trial advocacy skills, drafting of policy papers, and legislative drafting. ......................... 9 Activity 1(b): Providing technical assistance to build the organizational sustainability of partner organizations, including strategic planning, accounting practices, and financial and human resource management. ............................................................................................................................................... 9 Activity 1(c) Improving the reach of partner organizations through trainings focused on leadership, public outreach, and informational and advocacy campaigns. .................................................................. 12 Activity 1(d): Improving linkages between partner organizations and courts to build a foundation for exchanges and mutual learning, contributing to a more citizen-driven experience in Ukrainian courts... 13 Activity 1(e): Supporting â&#x20AC;&#x153;know your rightsâ&#x20AC;? and public information campaigns (and other types of educational outreach) by partners in the legal issue areas targeted by the program. ................................ 15 Objective 2: Build a sustainable nationwide network of legal advocacy organizations that address citizen demand for legal services in specific areas of the law and leverage the work of such organizations for national reform efforts and promote broader access to justice. ..................................................................... 18 Activity 2(a): Creating multiple national networks and associations that bring together legal advocacy organizations focused on similar issues in order to support regular interactions between representatives and support joint advocacy campaigns where feasible.............................................................................. 18 Activity 2(b) Developing synergies between the work done by regional advocacy organizations at the local level and regional and national policymakers, in order to build a vital link between effective advocacy campaigns and promising reform efforts in program-supported priority issue areas. ............... 20 Activity 2(c) Providing seminars, conferences and other continuing education training on best practices and legal developments in the specific areas of law targeted by the networks. ........................................ 22 Activity 2(d) Engaging the public in policy debates relating to specific issue areas championed by legal advocacy groups by holding public town halls, local campaigns, or other venues that allow for community involvement............................................................................................................................ 24 Activity 2(e) Developing network sustainability by researching and analyzing the most promising business practices and business models for organizing the work of legal advocacy groups in Ukraine and creating mechanisms and working with media to share these findings and implement such models on a national basis. ............................................................................................................................................ 24 Activity 2(f) Assisting in the establishment of an institutionalized forum that brings together the representatives of legal advocacy groups with justice sector officials to regularly communicate public experiences with the courts and the justice system more broadly to practitioners. ................................... 25 Activity 2(g) Fostering links between issue based legal advocacy networks established in Ukraine and those in neighboring countries focused on the same subjects to share best practices and promote regional cooperation. ............................................................................................................................................... 26 Activity 2(h) Developing a quarterly newsletter, webzines, or other means of communication that increases awareness of issues, problems and resources related to the legal issue network. ...................... 26 4 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; June 15, 2014

Activity 2(i) Creating programmatic links and points of interaction between rule of law activities in the formal justice sector and access to justice activities, in order to enable USAID rule of law programs to adapt implementation approaches as necessary to better respond to public demands on the court system in Ukraine. ................................................................................................................................................. 27 Objective 3: Develop partnerships and attract additional private resources to expand and enhance the impact of the programâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pro bono efforts. .................................................................................................... 28 Activity 3(a) Creating a national legal sector clearing house that connects private sector lawyers with clients in need of legal assistance and provides quality and timely assistance to vulnerable underrepresented groups. .......................................................................................................................... 28 Activity 3(d) Recruiting pro bono volunteers from law firms and providing them with training on specific legal advocacy and technical skills in the areas of law targeted by the program......................... 29 Activity 3(e) Developing internship programs for private sector lawyers and pro bono competitions for law firms to develop the pro bono service culture within the country. ..................................................... 30 Activity 3(f) Generating support for legal advocacy organizations from local businesses and creating a dialogue on selected issue areas. ............................................................................................................... 31 Cross-cutting factors ......................................................................................................................................... 31 Methods of Assistance ...................................................................................................................................... 32 Project Results/Performance Indicators ............................................................................................................ 34 Project Accomplishments/Impact ..................................................................................................................... 36 Issues and Problems/Lessons Learned .............................................................................................................. 38 Comments and Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 39 Annexes ............................................................................................................................................................. 40

5 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; June 15, 2014

LIST OF ACRONYMS ACLU

American Civil Liberties Union

COP

Chief of Party

CSF

Client Satisfaction Form

CSR

Corporate Social Responsibility

DCOP

Deputy Chief of Party

ECHR

European Court of Human Rights

ENEMO

European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations

FAIR

USAID FAIR Justice Project

Fiscal year

IDF

Institutional Development Framework

IFC

International Finance Corporation

IIPs

Institutional Improvement Plans

IOM

International Organization for Migration

LAOs

Legal Advocacy Organizations

LEP

Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project

M&E

Monitoring & Evaluation

MSI

Management Systems International

MOJ

Ministry of Justice

Member of Parliament, Verkhovna Rada

NED

National Endowment for Democracy

NGO

Non-Governmental Organization

NLADA

National Legal Aid and Defenders Association

OSCE

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

PDP

USAID Parliamentary Development Project

PSA

Public Service Announcement

UCLA

All-Ukrainian Coalition for Legal Aid

UNITER

Ukraine National Initiatives to Enhance Reforms Project

USAID

United States Agency for International Development

6 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; June 15, 2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine (LEP), implemented by Management System International (MSI), achieved three fundamental objectives: (1) strengthening the capacity of Ukrainian legal advocacy organizations (LAOs) to effectively represent the interests of citizens; (2) building a sustainable nationwide network of LAOs that address citizen demand for legal services in specific areas of law and leverage the work of such organizations for national reform efforts and promote broader access to justice; and (3) developing partnerships and attracting additional private resources to expand and enhance the impact of the program’s pro bono efforts. All of LEP’s activities promoted self-reliance and increased capacity, in accordance with our mantra: legal aid by Ukrainians for Ukrainians. LEP’s approach was guided by our philosophy that the most sustainable way of increasing access to justice was through empowerment of people, organizations, and institutions. LEP empowered people by increasing legal literacy. Many Ukrainians, especially those in the lower income categories, were unaware of their legal rights, or how to claim benefits and services to which they were entitled as a matter of law. LEP not only informed the citizenry of their rights but also provided them with the means to enforce them, either through self-help guidance, or by facilitating their access to quality legal aid. LEP empowered legal advocacy organizations by imbuing them with the practical skills and substantive knowledge necessary to provide quality representation on matters most commonly affecting the poor. Further LEP built their ability to effectively advocate for change, identifying needed reforms and collaboratively working with policymakers to find solutions. Finally, linking student legal clinics, NGO lawyers, and private practitioners willing to contribute legal aid into a unified coalition, LEP not only increased the supply and diversity of legal aid providers, but created a sustainable network that facilitates information sharing and perpetuates mutual learning. LEP empowered governmental institutions by creating stronger communication and linkages with civil society and with the private sector. LEP’s governmental counterpart, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (MOJ) formally commended LEP for its work with the regional consultation centers— providing them training, but also linking them to their legal aid counterparts in civil society for case referrals and information sharing. In addition, by bringing judges and legal aid providers together, these important stakeholders found opportunities for mutually beneficial collaboration. Objective 1: Strengthening the capacity of Ukrainian legal advocacy organizations (LAOs) to effectively represent the interests of citizens: Although various organizations offered legal aid in Ukraine, they were uncoordinated—working largely in isolation of one another, reducing their efficiency, and without specialization, reducing their effectiveness. Over the course of the project, LEP worked with legal aid providers in 25 regions of Ukraine, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, including 90 NGOs, 14 student legal clinics, and more than 400 MOJ regional consultation centers. LEP conducted a full series on practical skills training—from client consultations through the court processes to appellate procedures and ending with making applications to the European Court of Human Rights. LAOs were further strengthened by LEP’s trainings on substantive issues of law most germane to legal aid clientele. Objective 2: Building a sustainable nationwide network of LAOs that address citizen demand for legal services in specific areas of law and leverage the work of such organizations for national reform efforts and promote broader access to justice: LEP’s legacy organization, the Ukrainian Coalition for Legal Aid (UCLA), registered as a membership-based charitable organization under the laws of Ukraine on May 13, 2013. Representing 9 founding members from 9 regions, UCLA has partners with expertise in poverty law— specifically employment, healthcare, and property rights. Since its registration, 5 additional NGOs have joined UCLA, and more than 20,000 clients have received services. Through information campaigns, UCLA 7 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

ensured that citizens throughout Ukraine were informed of their right to counsel as the Law on Free Legal Aid came into effect, as well as providing self-help solutions for common issues. In addition, UCLA was instrumental in promoting regulatory reforms to the procedures for registering title to immoveable property as well as administrative services through the MOJ. Moreover, enabling UCLA to respond to urgent needs stemming from the civil unrest and political upheaval in Ukraine in the final months of the project, LEP helped UCLA secure funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the Norwegian Embassy. Several other grants are currently pending which will continue UCLA’s activities indefinitely. Objective 3: Developing partnerships and attracting additional private resources to expand and enhance the impact of the program’s pro bono efforts. Expanding the supply and variety of legal aid services available, LEP stimulated the private sector’s involvement in supporting legal aid. Exceeding expectations, LEP partnered with 28 law firms and 1 business entity, leveraging USAID’s investment with contributions of services and commodities valued at more than $200,000 exceeding the cost share in MSI’s agreement—and building a lasting commitment to legal aid in Ukraine. In addition, UCLA recruited another 35 law firms in the regions to accept case referrals from its legal aid clearinghouse. UCLA has further developed a web portal, which promotes legal literacy by providing a variety of self-help tools, as well as putting clients in touch with appropriate legal aid providers. This report constitutes LEP’s final report, presenting results of activities carried out from May 5, 2010 through June 15, 2014.

8 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

PROGRAM ACTIVITIES Objective 1: Strengthen the capacity of legal advocacy organizations to effectively represent the interests of citizens. Activity 1(a): Developing demand-driven technical training for partner organizations on specialized topics including trial advocacy skills, drafting of policy papers, and legislative drafting. LEP developed and conducted the following technical training for partner organizations: •

September 2010, Kyiv: leading NGOs shared best practices in advocacy and client consultations.

•

December 2010, Kharkiv: roles of various stakeholders in the justice process, from legal education, student legal clinics, NGOs, the MOJ, and courts.

•

March 2011, Ivano-Frankivsk: Trial Skills Series - conducting the client interview; Advocacy skills Legislative drafting processes, using problem-solving methods.

•

May 2011, Simferopol: Trial Skills Series - Providing initial consultation

•

September 2011, L’viv: Trial Skills - Professional ethics

•

December 2011, Donetsk: Trial Skills - Court filings

•

March 2012, Khmelnytskyi: Trial Skills - Administrative proceedings

•

July 2012, Odessa: Trial Skills: Dispute resolution - Mediation Techniques

•

October 2012, Uzhhorod: Trial Skills - Civil trials

•

February 2013, Zaporizhzhia: Trial Skills - Enforcement of judgments

•

April 2013, Lutsk: Trial Skills: Application procedures for appeals to the European Court of Human Rights

Activity 1(b): Providing technical assistance to build the organizational sustainability of partner organizations, including strategic planning, accounting practices, and financial and human resource management. LEP provided ongoing technical assistance in organizational development to LAOs individually, and later collectively through UCLA. 2010-2011, IDF and IIPs: Using MSI’s civil society analytic tool, the Institutional Development Framework (IDF), LEP worked with its LAO partners to identify their strengths and weaknesses across key capacity markers: oversight and vision, management resources, human resources, financial resources, and external resources. Sixty-five LAOs completed the self-assessment using MSI’s IDF tool, and based upon the information yielded through the IDF, LEP worked with its partners to develop Institutional Improvement Plans (IIPs) — detailed, tailored strategies to address shortcomings. For individual assistance with these shortcomings, LEP collaborated with USAID’s dedicated civil society capacity building project, UNITER, which had facilitated an “NGO Marketplace” providing technical assistance on NGO capacity building. The IIPs provided an individualized roadmap that LAOs could use to select trainings and services available through the NGO Marketplace. 2011-2014: As the network of legal aid providers came into being, LEP’s capacity building efforts shifted to growing and sustaining the coalition. That said, many aspects of the organizational sustainability assistance 9 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

provided to the network doubled as best practices for individual partners within their respective NGOs. The first set of activities involved LAO partners working in specialized areas of law: •

Horizontal Integration/Networking around thematic areas of law: Working meetings were held for LAOs interested in each of the thematic areas. o

November 2011: Healthcare, Lviv

November 2101: Property: Kyiv

November 2011: Employment: Yaremche

LEP provided technical assistance at these working meetings on strategic approaches, including settling upon their collective mission, vision, branding, membership definition, joint activities, monitoring and evaluation, internal communication, and public outreach. As a result of these dedicated meetings, thematic networks progressed in their institutional development by adopting mission statements, designing brand logos, and developing and beginning to implement communication and outreach strategies. Further network meetings continued discussions and trainings on increasing understanding of the value of networking and building organizational capacity of the thematic groups:

•

April 2012: Healthcare, Lviv

April 2012: Property, Lutsk

May 2012: Employment, Yaremche

November 2012: Healthcare, Kyiv

Vertical Integration/Networking different types of LAOs: LEP provided technical assistance on how to incorporate LAOs of different types and experience levels into a single network. o

December 2010 (Kharkiv): Arkadiy Bushchenko of the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union discussed values of being in a coalition, and sharing his own experience of coalition-building.

December 2011: MSI’s Technical Director, Ellen Seats, provided examples of other networks that are built around a common theme yet involving different organizational types. Specific organizational models included the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Poverty Law Center, the Innocence Network, and the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations (ENEMO).

May 2011: Attorney Oleg Veremienko gave a presentation on networking in Ukraine, describing his law firm’s participation in the Innocence Network.

10 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

Coalition Building: As the thematic networks coalesced, LEP began helping them evolve into substantive divisions of a single legal aid coalition, first by organizing network meetings for 2 thematic networks to explore potential synergies: o o

March 2012, Yaremche: Joint meeting of property and employment networks. April 2012, Yaremche: Joint meeting of employment and healthcare networks.

LEP provided partner LAOs with examples of different models, each with distinct advantages and application in specific circumstances:

•

March 2012: National Legal Aid and Defenders Association (NLADA): Don Saunders, NLADA Vice President, traveled to Ukraine, free of charge, to share NLADA’s experience, including organizational structure, internal governance, fundraising, public communication and membership services. NLADA is a legal aid coalition uniting over 3,000 legal aid providers in the U.S. NLADA has continued its relationship with UCLA with electronic communications and hosting UCLA members visiting Washington, D.C. in their offices.

October 2012, Legal Status: LEP’s Legal Advisor, Oleksandr Vinnikov, presented various options under Ukrainian law for a network of NGOs to obtain legal status, together with the relative advantages of each. With the anticipated passage of the Law of Charitable Organizations, LEP partners were attracted to the flexibility in terms of membership and the tax exempt status.

September 2013, Organizational Issues: LEP facilitated training and moderated informal discussion on internal framework issues, including membership criteria and fees and decision-making processes.

November 2013, Financial Sustainability: LEP staff introduced UCLA members to the prospect of an endowment to provide an income stream indefinitely.

January 2014, Financial Sustainability: LEP continued training on setting up an endowment.

Strategic Planning: o

March 2011 – June 2013, Introduction to Strategic Planning: LEP’s Network Coaches, Nataliya Kachanova, Vasyl Poluyko, and Ihor Dobko led trainings on the elements and importance of strategic planning. This introduction was supported by ongoing technical assistance to each of the networks by their respective Coach at regular intervals and on demand.

September 2011, Strategic Planning in Practice: LEP’s Organizational Development expert, Svetlana Gorna, conducted an interactive session regarding application of the strategic planning principles to individual LAOs as well as to networks.

March 2011, November 2013, March 2014, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E): LEP supported a series of M&E trainings, followed by hands-on technical assistance on utilization of the M&E principles in particular situations. The utility of M&E, methods of data collection, and analysis was presented by Svetlana Gorna. MSI’s Technical Director, Ellen L. Seats, added practical application, introducing the Client Satisfaction Form (CSF) as a tool for measuring and documenting the quality and quantity of client consultations (see annex 3 for the CSF). Between trainings, LEP’s Network Coaches worked with LAOs and networks to institutionalize these tools.

11 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

June 2011- May 2013, Internal Communication: LEP developed an internal web page to encourage regular communication between and among LAOs. To stimulate this communication, LEP’s Legal Advisor posted substantive updates on the law and pertinent social issues about which the Network Coaches would post provocative questions and moderate virtual discussions among members on a regular basis.

November 2011 - November 2013, Media Relations: LEP’s Communications Advisor, Svitlana Slabinska, provided several practical trainings on working with media, developing success stories, drafting press releases, writing editorials, and using web-based communication. LEP then facilitated practical application of these skills by creating opportunities for LAO partners to meet with media, prepare press releases and editorials, and publicize success stories. This ongoing technical assistance culminated in a detailed Communication Strategy for UCLA.

July 2012, July 2013, September 2013, Fundraising Workshops: LEP’s Fundraising Expert, Jennifer Bradshaw, led three workshops on fundraising with UCLA. Topics included non-donor funding opportunities (private sector, individual beneficiaries, foundations, and governmental), cultivation techniques, and making the “ask.” Different means of managing funding flows, including sustaining donations and endowments under Ukrainian law were also introduced by LEP’s UCLA members at the Fundraising workshop on July 24-25, 2013 Legal Advisor.

July 2013-May 2014, Financial Sustainability/Fundraising Strategy: Working directly with the UCLA leadership, LEP assisted UCLA with creating a working list of funding opportunities, adopting an action plan for pursuing those opportunities, and developing a portfolio of their work.

November 2013 - May 2014, Financial Accounting and Reporting: LEP’s Deputy Chief of Party, Lesia Nikitova, provided both formal training to UCLA and its members on financial practices, as well as giving practical and timely feedback on the accounting and substantive reports submitted per LEP’s grant agreements.

December 2013 - February 2014, Proposal Writing: MSI’s Technical Director and LEP’s Fundraising Experts worked intensively with UCLA members to prepare solid grant proposals to the NED, the Norwegian, Canadian, Dutch and US Embassies, and International Finance Corporation (IFC).

April 2014, June 2014, Grant Implementation: LEP staff hosted two workshops with the Coalition to assign responsibilities and develop an implementation plan for UCLA’s grant from NED and the Norwegian Embassy.

Activity 1(c) Improving the reach of partner organizations through trainings focused on leadership, public outreach, and informational and advocacy campaigns. LEP offered several trainings to partner LAOs on information campaigns, advocacy campaigns and public outreach throughout the project. •

Information Campaigns 12

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

December 2010, Planning an Informational Campaign: LEP’s Coach, Nataliya Kachanova trained LEP partners on developing effective public information campaign, from formulating the message, defining the target audience, and selecting the appropriate communication conduit.

Advocacy Campaigns o

December 2011, Introduction to Advocacy Campaigns: Coinciding with LEP’s announcement 2013, UCLA members discuss their of a grant competition for advocacy campaigns, July advocacy campaign in the LEP office. training was provided to partner LAOs on identifying an appropriate issue, developing the message, defining stakeholders and targeting the audience, and determining the best methodology.

February - March 2012, Practical Application: The second training related more specifically to the proposed campaigns, providing constructive feedback and exploring solutions.

February 2013, Case Study: LEP organized a lessons-learned workshop using the experience of advocating for amendments to the Law on NGOs as a practical case study.

March - July 2013, Technical Assistance: LEP’s Advocacy Expert Maxim Latsyba, worked directly with partners in developing new advocacy proposals. Even following the award of an advocacy grant, LEP staff continued to provide ongoing advice and assistance, including coaching partners on delivery mechanisms.

Public Outreach: o

November 2011 - November 2013: Media outreach: These trainings included practical guidance on writing a press release, choosing a target audience, approaching journalists/editors, interviewing for the press, effective success story writing, etc. LEP also conducted training on building a “Media Map” for the regions where UCLA works. The training further included practical elements, staging an interactive press conference with Coalition members role-playing as speakers, journalists, and moderators.

May 2013, November 2013, Social Media: In separate trainings, UCLA members received information on how to use social media and Google services to further promote their activities and raise their public profile. LEP’s Communications Advisor provided individual consultations with partners on an ongoing basis.

Activity 1(d): Improving linkages between partner organizations and courts to build a foundation for exchanges and mutual learning, contributing to a more citizen-driven experience in Ukrainian courts. Ukrainian courts have traditionally had an antagonistic relationship with legal aid providers. To improve the linkages and facilitate collaboration, LEP found opportunities to bring these stakeholders together in trainings, site visits, and collaboration. •

Engaging judges and court staff as trainers at quarterly meetings: o

December 2010, Kharkiv: Stanisalv Shevchuk, ad hoc Judge of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) addressed the importance of access to justice and the role of the ECHR.

March 2011, Ivano-Frankivsk: Judge Nadia Stefaniv, Head of Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast Court of Appeals, made a presentation entitled “Judiciary and Civil Society Groups: Working 13

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Together to the Rule of Law” during which she expressed her interest in increasing public awareness about the judiciary and improving interaction between courts and society.

•

December 2011, Donetsk: Judge Andriy Volkov, Judge at the Kyiv Circuit Administrative Court, provided an overview of Ukraine’s justice system and the jurisdictional framework. Staff Manager of the Petrovskiy District City Court of Donetsk, Iryna Kartasheva, spoke on initiatives to improve citizen services in the Court.

October 2012, Uzhhorod: Zakarpattya Appeals Court Judge Hanna Fazikosh contributed to LEP’s trial skills series, providing a judge’s perspective on trial advocacy techniques. She shared practical tips on presenting alternative claims, and making allegations sufficiently precise; she also shared a number of examples of common mistakes lawyers make in their applications.

February 2013, Zaporizhzhia: Judge Svitlana Malovichko, of the oblast Court of Appeals shared advice on formulating the claimant’s demands. Nataliya Khramova, acting Head of the State Enforcement Department delivered a training the structure, authorities, and procedures of the enforcement service

April 2013, Lutsk: Judge Buromenskiy, ad hoc Judge, together with Ms. Olga Dmytrenko, staff attorney in the admissions office at the ECHR, helped participants understand the Court’s application procedures and standards.

September 2013, Dnipropetrovsk: Judge Olena Svistunova, of the oblast Court of Appeals, led a training on Judicial Practices of Declaration of Titles to Immoveable Property.

November 2013, Chernivsti: Judge Oleksiy Chernovskiy, ex-Chair of the Court of Appeals of Chernivsti Oblast, provided a summary of his court’s initiatives to improve citizen services within the justice sector. Judge Halyna Stankovska provided an overview of the significance of the recent procedural reforms to the Code of Criminal Procedure. Ivan Sorokhan, Head of Staff of the same court, shared with the participants the court’s initiatives to improve external communications and access to the court.

Judge Oleksiy, Chernovskiy of Chernivtsi Oblast Court of Appeals, speaking to QM12 participants on organizational and administrative aspects for citizens’ access to justice.

Site Visits: Building the linkages between LAOs and courts beyond the training realm, LEP organized site visits for partner LAOs to interested courts, creating an opportunity for informal dialogue and mutual feedback. o

March 2011, Ivano-Frankivsk: Judge Stefaniv invited LEP’s partners to visit her court and discussed ways of improving the citizen perceptions.

December 2011, Donetsk: LAOs visited the Donetsk Oblast Court of Appeals to observe first-hand initiatives to enhance the user Participants at QM12 in Chernivtsi, November 27-28, 2013. experience. 14

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

April 2013, Lutsk: Judge Oksana Zavydovska-Marchuk of the Volyn Court of Appeals invited UCLA to her court to showcase its efforts to promote transparency and openness through public communication and mass media.

Collaboration: o

January 2012-indefinite: LEP’s site visit led to the Donetsk Oblast Court of Appeals posting contact information for LEP partners in the reception area, to help connect people with legal aid providers.

May 2013-indefinite: LEP coordinated with the Court of Appeals in Volyn Oblast to post contact information for legal aid services available through UCLA and other LEP partners on the court’s official website, as well as on the informational bulletin board in the reception area. Further, the Court of Appeals disseminated information on UCLA and regional LEP partners to all District Courts in Volyn Oblast, several of whom in turn posted the information on their respective websites.

Activity 1(e): Supporting “know your rights” and public information campaigns (and other types of educational outreach) by partners in the legal issue areas targeted by the program. LEP supported different types of public information campaigns. In order to popularize the availability, and quality of legal aid, LEP and its partners implemented several activities: •

Public information campaigns: o September 2011-October 2012, Patient Rights: LEP supported a campaign to inform citizens of their rights to medical care and in the doctor/patient relationship. o

February – July 2012, Human Rights in the Medical Sphere: LEP support a campaign in Dnipropetrovsk Region to enhance awareness of human rights concerns arising from limited healthcare systems.

February – July 2012, Know Your Rights: LEP supported efforts to apprise rural citizens in Sumy of their rights with respect to health care, employment, and property rights, as well as advertising the availability of legal aid services.

February – July 2012, Know Your Rights: LEP’s partner conducted a campaign to inform youth in Ivano-Frankivsk region of their options and rights in the employment sphere.

February – July 2012, Labor Rights: In Chernihiv region, LEP supported information on employment equality in labor relations.

February – July 2012, Access to Legal Aid: LEP partners publicized the availability of legal aid services in Lviv oblast.

February – July 2012, Land Reform: LEP supported information dissemination on land reform to ensure vulnerable segments of the population are aware of their rights.

February – July 2012, Employment Rights: LEP partners raised awareness of employment rights for rural residents in L’viv oblast.

February – July 2012, Property Rights: LEP supported an information campaign targeting condominium residents on the process of property registration.

February – July 2012, Land Rights: Residents in Rivne and L’viv became informed of their land rights as well as legal aid services available in the region.

February – July 2012, Know Your Rights: Property rights targeting residents of private dwellings in Pavlograd and Zinkiv Districts of Dnipropetrovsk. 15

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

July – September 2012, Youth Rights: LEP supported a youth camp for teens from lowincome families in Ivano-Frankivsk, Luhansk, Sumy, and Kherson regions, making them aware of their rights in employment and healthcare.

July 2013 – March 2014, Labor Rights: LEP supported a public information campaign to increase legal literacy among laborers in private enterprises in Luhansk region concerning the right to organize and freely associate.

Television spots: o

November, 2011: To denounce the perception that legal aid was relevant only to insignificant matters, LEP produced a video featuring a testimonial of a legal aid client who received palliative care only as a result of a partner LAO’s intervention. The video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reouk-NIHdk, was aired free of charge on national television, UTR, as well as on State regional channels from December 2011 through June 2012.

November – December, 2011: LEP further sought to dispel the inaccurate notion that private lawyers in Ukraine were unwilling to contribute services on a pro bono basis. LEP produced a public service advert highlighting the significant contributions of one of its pro bono partners. In addition to crediting attorneys actively engaged in pro bono activities, the television spot, which was carried by UTR national television January through June 2012 connected LEP with more attorneys wanting to support the project.

November, 2012: Agency for Private Initiative Development video on availability of legal aid through UCLA.

2012-2013: Ukraine’s national television network, UTR, continued its collaboration with LEP, inviting its Chief of Party, Communications and Outreach Advisor, and Legal Advisor to participate in its program Ukrayina Aktualna.

Talk Shows:

LEP participating in the TV Program “Ukrayina

October 2012, Uzhhorod: LEP coordinated Aktualna” with the television channel, Tysa-1, to feature LEP’s experts, UCLA and its members on a 60 minute talk show dedicated to the rights under the new Law on Free Legal Aid. The model was replicated in Khmelnytskyi.

May 2014: LEP organized a series of television interviews, in light of the heightened legal aid needs related to the civil crisis in Ukraine. UCLA’s Chairman provided an interview on national television regarding the availability of services through UCLA, with particular emphasis on the legal needs of internally displaced people as a result of the annexation of Crimea. UCLA’s Executive Director was interviewed by the same channel on legal rights stemming from the civil unrest. Similar shows, featuring UCLA members were aired in Pavlograd and Voznesensk.

June 2014-ongoing: LEP proposed a weekly series of 30 minute spots to be aired on national television to promote legal literacy. UCLA’s Chairman will host these programs, scheduled to start in June 2014.

Media coverage: 16

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

May 2011-March 2014, Quarterly Meetings: LEP attracted substantial regional and national media at each of its quarterly meetings, starting in May 2011. Journalists were invited to cover the opening, where high-level speakers on the presidium addressed the importance of legal aid, and the promoted the various legal aid services available in the region.

April 2013, UCLA Public launch: Further apprising citizens of the legal aid services available through UCLA, LEP organized a public event for various stakeholders in the justice sector. This event was widely covered in the national and local media.

September 2013: Introduction of Executive Director - LEP took advantage of UCLA’s election of its Executive Director to attract more publicity of its services, holding a public event for representatives of the private and public sectors that was widely covered in the press.

Internet/Social Media o

December 2010-November 2014: To broaden its reach, LEP used its website, www.pravovakrayina.org.ua , UCLA’s web portal, www.pravoonline.org.ua, as well as its Facebook page, to publicize UCLA and its services throughout the course of the project. LEP activities and those of its partners were continuously highlighted through these virtual tools.

In addition to making citizens aware of the availability and quality of legal aid services, LEP advanced legal literacy, raising citizen awareness of substantive legal rights, and the procedures for perfecting those rights. Specific activities included: •

•

• 1

Internet o

December 2010 - November 2014: In addition to advertising the availability of legal aid services as described above, LEP’s project website1 promoted legal literacy. Partners regularly posted informational articles on legal developments. Further, the website served as a means of proliferating legal literacy articles and activities conducted by the partners by reposting newsletters and brochures and newspaper articles, as well as uploading television spots. Collecting more than 2,500 hits per quarter, the website has been a valuable resource.

January - April 2014: With the registration of the UCLA, LEP supported a more robust tool for improving legal literacy. UCLA’s web portal, www.pravoonline.org.ua, provides information and incorporates interactive self-help tools. UCLA members have transferred key articles from the LEP website, as well as uploading templates, forms, and instructions to help citizens resolve matters independently. The web portal also serves as a clearinghouse, connecting citizens with legal aid providers, as needed (see Annex 2 for the list of clearinghouse partners).

Television spots: o

June 2012: LEP partner Goreniye prepared an infomercial on registering rural land titles.

March – June 2014, Voter education/information: UCLA prepared two television spots, in Ukrainian and Russian, informing citizens of the voting processes, and encouraging voters to exercise this right. These public service announcements (PSAs) aired on national and regional television free of charge in the weeks leading up to the historic May 2014 election. This activity was funded through an external grant awarded to UCLA from NED.

Print Media

www.pravovakrayina.org.ua 17

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

January 2013 - indefinite: LEP negotiated a mutually beneficial relationship with the newspaper, Uryadovyi Kuryer, to run a regular legal literacy column, “Ask a Lawyer,” featuring UCLA. The newspaper’s editor shares common questions submitted by the readership with UCLA partners, who draft detailed responses for publication on a weekly basis. The newspaper has a subscribership of 500,000; in addition, in the online version UCLA’s column records 2,000 hits on average.

Radio o

March - October 2012, Khmelnytskyi, Odessa, Uzhhorod: LEP partners addressed legal aid matters on the radio in conjunction with Quarterly Meetings in those regions.

April 2013, Lutsk: Volyn state radio broadcast a 1-hour radio program featuring the official announcement of UCLA, with UCLA members answering calls from the public.

October 2013, Khmelnytskyi: Regional radio stations, “Misto nad Bugom” and Chortkiv (Ternopil), covered LEP-UCLA’s Media Day presentations.

March 2014, Zaporizhzhia: two regional stations, Radio 3 and Zaporizhzhia FM, broadcasted an informational program on LEP and UCLA in concert with Media Day. UCLA members responded to citizen phone calls in the course of these programs.

Newsletters o

April 2012 - January 2014, Newsletters: in collaboration with the MOJ, LEP has supported the issuance of 9 bi-monthly newsletters, addressing topics of common interest to legal aid clients. UCLA members regularly submit articles promoting legal literacy on topics such as inheritance, domestic law, and access to medical care. Four thousand copies of each edition are distributed directly to legal aid clients through the MOJ Consultation Centers.

Promotion of networking concept: The concept was broadly introduced to legal aid providers of various sorts to generate interest in developing a comprehensive network. o

September 2010: Project Launch in Kyiv for 89 legal aid providers, (61 from NGOs and student legal clinics, and 28 representing law firms and bar associations), introducing the project and generating interest in participating in legal aid networks.

September - December 2010: Conducting outreach to legal aid providers throughout Ukraine, introducing concept of networking and receiving feedback on the challenges to providing legal aid in Ukraine. 18

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

o •

•

Formation of networks: The first networks were formed around common expertise and practice areas most relevant to Ukraine’s poor-health, labor, and property rights. o

October 2010 - June 2013, Creation of thematic networks: An organizational development expert was dedicated to each of three networks, bringing legal aid providers with common expertise together. The “Coaches” worked on a part-time basis directly with LAOs individually as well as collectively within each network, providing technical guidance on the benefits of networking, collaboration, and capacity building on an ongoing basis.

September 2011 - February 2013, Selection of coordinators: For each of the three networks LEP selected a leading NGO to serve as a network coordinator on a competitive basis, charging them with the responsibility of building the basic identity of each coalition, recruiting new partners, establishing regular communication and information-sharing among partners, and working in a participatory manner.

Consolidating networks into a Coalition: having demonstrated the benefits of collaboration, the thematic networks came together to form a national coalition of legal aid. o

•

December 2010: Networking conference in Kharkiv, gathering interested LAOs to further explore the development of legal aid networks in Ukraine.

March - December 2012: At quarterly meetings and workshops the putative coalition developed and adopted a joint logo, established internal communications via the internal website, and implemented joint public information and advocacy campaigns. Specific capacity building activities set forth in Activity 1(b), above.

Formalizing legal status of the Coalition o

July - December 2012: Partner LAOs decided to register as a charitable organization, under the law passed by the Verkhovna Rada in July 2012. In preparation for this, LEP hosted two workshops and provided ongoing consultations to facilitate the drafting and adoption of the organizational framework, including defining governance bodies, bylaws, and membership criteria) with interested LAO partners.

January - May 2013: The coalition formal registration was delayed due to the President’s failure to sign on a timely basis. LEP partners promoted the execution of this law by submitting a formal request for information on the status of the law to the Parliamentary Secretariat and then made a separate request later to the Presidential Administration. LEP partners were preparing to register as an NGO in January 2013, when the President ultimately did sign the Law on Charitable Organizations in February 2013. The culmination of this intense effort was the formal registration of the UCLA as a membership based charitable organization in Ukraine in May 2013, with 9 founding members (including eight NGOs and one law firm).

Expanding the Capacity of UCLA o

March 2013, Establishment of board of directors: UCLA’s Board of Directors consists of 4 leading members, plus the Chairman. One of UCLA’s most active pro bono lawyers, Roman Shurduk, volunteered to serve as the Chairman of UCLA’s Board.

September 2013: Election of Executive Director, Vitaliy Misyats. UCLA hosted a public reception to introduce its Executive Director to various stakeholders, including law firms, national and regional authorities, businesses, civil society leaders, and members of the donor community. MP Igor Miroshnychenko, Deputy Head of the Parliamentary Committee on Freedom of Speech, provided the keynote speech, congratulating UCLA as an innovative leader in the legal aid community in Ukraine. MP Miroshnychenko further stressed UCLA’s 19

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

role as effective advocates for policy reform on issues most directly impacting Ukraine’s poor. o

June 2013 - June 2014: While still providing technical support, LEP gradually transferred the decision-making and organizational responsibility to the Coalition’s leadership. The Executive Director and Chairman facilitated internal communications, took responsibility for implementation and reporting on grant activities, set agendas for Quarterly Meetings, and moderated Coalition meetings.

June 2013 - September 2013: UCLA accepted applications from 5 LAOs who met the membership criteria, bringing the Coalition’s membership up to 14 LAOs in 11 oblasts, plus associate members of affiliated law firms and the Association of Student Legal Clinics.

September 2013 - June 2014: To further promote unity within UCLA, to publicize it as a formal entity, and to provide it with a history of implementing grant activities, LEP awarded UCLA two grants. The first promoted UCLA’s ability to collaborate with public officials in providing citizen services, supporting the roll-out of LEP’s innovative “Skype in Villages” project to 8 oblasts. The second grant required UCLA members to develop and populate the new web portal with a variety of legal literacy materials. This second grant was extended to support UCLA members providing legal aid to internally displaced people, in response to the crisis situation in Ukraine.

May 2012 - March 2014: Media relations: LEP also continued to publicize opportunities to receive high-quality legal aid working with UCLA to establish relations with the mass media and create UCLA’s pool of journalists, in particular, by arranging the Media Club meetings. See Activity 2(e) below. LEP also helped UCLA members work with the media independently to publicize UCLA and its services.

February - June 2014: LEP assisted UCLA in executing its fundraising strategy by collaborating in the preparation of proposal narratives and budgets for grant applications submitted to NED and the Norwegian, Dutch, and US Embassies. Cultivation meetings were also held with prospective donors, including the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the European Union, and the Canadian Embassy.

January 2014, Membership in the American Chamber of Commerce: UCLA became a member of the American Chamber of Commerce (ACC), enhancing its reputation as a legal entity and enabling it to expand its relationship with the business community in Ukraine.

March - June 2014, Implementation of non-USAID activities: LEP has worked closely with UCLA as it embarks on its first independently funded activities. UCLA developed voter information announcements and conducted consultations on voter rights from March through Election Day on May 25. Also, UCLA expanded its successful collaboration with local authorities, instituting “Skype in the Villages” in 8 oblasts, engaging local representatives from the respective pension funds, health departments and employment centers.

Activity 2(b) Developing synergies between the work done by regional advocacy organizations at the local level and regional and national policymakers, in order to build a vital link between effective advocacy campaigns and promising reform efforts in program-supported priority issue areas. LEP has facilitated collaboration between LAOs and regional and national policymakers that will persist beyond the project. Examples include: •

MOJ 20

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

December 2011, 2012, and 2013, Week of Law: LEP, UCLA, and the MOJ jointly put on the legal aid fair in conjunction with “Week of Law” festivities. UCLA organized its partners, pro bono attorneys, student legal clinics, and representatives from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the Pension Fund were available to provide information and directly consult with citizens. UCLA and its partner firms served more than 560 clients during the law weeks of 2011, 2012, and 2013.

January and April 2012, Advocacy on Law on Legal Aid: The Law on Free Legal Aid, passed in June 2011, did not include student legal clinics among the types of providers of secondary legal aid (court representation) eligible for government support. LEP organized two round tables for student legal clinics to voice their position to the MOJ, advocating for their inclusion as secondary legal aid providers under the law.2

April 2012 - April 2013: The coordinator of LEP’s healthcare network organized a series of roundtables and conferences with the MOJ exploring issue reforming the process of obtaining expert forensic examinations in cases of suspected medical malpractice.

March-April 2013, Advocacy on administrative reform: The MOJ requested further assistance in engaging civil society in the regions on the issue of administrative services. LEP supported UCLA’s organization of a second series of round tables in Vinnytsya, Lutsk and Odessa, on administrative services. Specific recommendations were submitted to the MOJ at the conclusion of the series.

October 2013, Advocacy on property registration law: In response to a request from the MOJ, LEP, through UCLA conducted a series of roundtables in Odessa, L’viv and Kyiv on the Registration of Property Rights and their Encumbrances: Challenges and Prospects. Attended by the State Registration Service, land management organizations, academics, and legal practitioners, the round tables highlighted issues regarding with communication between state agencies and lack of access to registration and cadastral data. The series yielded a set of recommendations to the MOJ, which led to regulatory reform.

April 2012 - January 2014, Legal Literacy Bulletins: LEP and UCLA were also invited to collaborate with the MOJ on its bi-monthly informational bulletin (see Activity 1(e), above). UCLA submitted articles responding to common questions and explaining essential rights, which were published in the bulletin together with information on UCLA and its members. The bulletin was distributed directly to citizens through the MOJ consultation centers.

May 2014, Final Conference: Deputy Minister Ihor Bondarchuk congratulated UCLA on making legal aid available to citizens throughout Ukraine.

MOJ regional consultation centers o

May 2011 - November 2013, started including representatives of the MOJ regional centers in LEP’s trainings at its Quarterly Meetings in May 2011; regional MOJ consultation centers sent representatives to each of LEP’s Quarterly Meetings from that date forward. See list of dates and locations detailed in Activity 1(a) above. Besides technical skills training (Activity 1(a)), they also participated in the substantive law sessions (Activity 2(c) and received LEP’s Visnyk (Activity 2(h)) Finally, LEP helped solidify the relationships between partners in the region and the local MOJ consultation centers through site visits to each other’s offices.

September 2011 – June 2014, Client Referrals: Stemming from LEP’s efforts to develop collaborative relationships between regional MOJ consultation centers and LEP partners, the

Ukrainian law distinguishes between primary legal aid—simple consultations—and secondary legal aid—court representation. Students in legal clinics may provide primary legal aid, but are seeking authorization under the law to also represent clients in court.

21 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

regional MOJ offices started referring clients with issues related to health, employment and property to the LAOs. •

•

MPs o

April 2011: MP Hryhoriy Kaletnik, Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Agrarian Policy and Land Resources participated in LEP’s Roundtable on titling, registration and transfer of rural land. Other participants included LEP partners, academics, heads of farmers’ organizations, and the State Agency on Land Resource.

December 2011: Member of Parliament (MP) Elina Shyshkina made keynote remarks at LEP’s first pro bono award ceremony.

September 2013: MP Ihor Miroshnychenko provided the keynote address at the public event introducing UCLA’s Executive Director, recognizing the important role of non-governmental legal aid providers in the justice sector.

Local authorities o

June 2011: LEP’s Healthcare network moderated a roundtable on The Availability of Medicines in Ukraine, involving various stakeholders, including the local health department.

March 2011 - November 2013: LEP engaged representatives from the Health Department at oblast state administrations, as well as regional branches of state employment inspection offices at each of its quarterly meetings. Also attending several quarterly meetings were representatives of the State Land Cadaster and Registration Service in the respective region. See Activity 1(a) for a list of dates and sites of the Quarterly Meetings.

September 2011: In conjunction with its Quarterly Meeting, LEP organized a site visit for its partners LAOs to the Lviv employment center

February 2013: In conjunction with its Quarterly Meeting, LEP organized a site visit for its partners to the Zaporizhzhia Social Protection Center.

September 2013 - June 2014, Virtual Consultations: LEP worked with oblast state administrations to collaborate on an initiative for LAOs, together with representatives of local agencies providing citizen services (employment centers, pension fund, health department, departments of justice, and notaries) Village authorities supported this effort by publicizing the schedule for these consultations. As of the end of project, consultation centers have been institutionalized in 8 oblasts, each serving multiple villages.

Activity 2(c) Providing seminars, conferences and other continuing education training on best practices and legal developments in the specific areas of law targeted by the networks. LEP ensured that its partners were well apprised of legal developments by making a variety of training opportunities available to them. •

Quarterly Meetings featured trainings/discussions on topical issues: o

December 2010, Kharkiv: Serhiy Prylypko, Director of the Institute for Legal Issues provided a substantive overview of the system of medical insurance and potential reforms in Ukraine.

March 2011, Ivano-Frankivsk: Training on 1) the status of the moratorium on the sale of agricultural and legal implications if it is lifted; 2) impact of healthcare reforms to close rural hospitals. 22

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

May 2011, Simferopol: 1) Analysis of the legislative initiatives in employment by the Independent Trade Union NGO and the Agency for Private Initiative Development. 2) Land Union of Ukraine led a discussion on the issues of sale of agricultural lands. 3) Access to quality healthcare in light of reforms.

September 2011, Lviv: 1) Deputy Director of the Department of Labor and Social Protection addressed human rights in employment; 2) Head of the Notary Office in the MOJ presented the legislation governing registration of rights to real estate; 3) Lead Specialist from the Department of Health made a presentation on the doctor/patient relationship and legal rights of each.

December 2011, Donetsk: Legislative updates in property, labor, and healthcare law provided by LEP’s Legal Advisor.

March 2012, Khmelnytskyi: LEP’s Legal Advisor led a discussion on substantive topics for public information campaigns in employment, healthcare, and property law.

July 2012, Odessa: Application and impact of the new Law on Personal Data Protection.

October 2012, Uzhhorod: LEP partners led a training on employment discrimination and rights of vulnerable groups which was supplemented by a presentation by the Deputy Head of the Zakarpattya Labor Inspection on the role of the state in protecting employee rights.

February 2013, Zaporizhzhia: LEP partners and the Head of the Regional Development Department and the regional branch of the State Enterprise Center for Land Cadastre collaborated on a training entitled: Realization of Land Titles: Peculiarities for Land Relations Regulation in 2013.

April 2013, Lutsk: Analysis of the system for registering immoveable property under the State Registration Services.

September 2013, Dnipropetrovsk: 1) Partner-led training on registration of immoveable property, particularly with respect to unfinished construction; 2) LEP’s Legal Advisor also conducted a training on equitable remedies for land titles; 3) Deputy head of the State Territorial Employment Inspection addressed safety in the workplace requirements; 4) Head of the Health Department made a presentation on state obligations to provide medical care in specific instances, and proof of eligibility.

November 2013, Chernivsti: 1) AgroInvest expert presented an overview of the legislative requirements for registering title to immoveable property; 2) a representative from the Health Department addressed the issue of informed consent for medical patients; 3) a representative from the Regional Labor Inspection department held a training on undocumented workers’ rights.

In addition, each of the 9 thematic network meetings (listed under Activity 1(b) above) involved substantive trainings, as well as vertical integration/networking. Additionally, the following substantive trainings were supported by LEP and its leading partners in each substantive sphere: o

April 2012: Ukrainian Scientific and Practical Conference on Medical Law, organized by LEP’s network coordinator the Foundation for Medical Law and Bioethics.

July 2012: Human Rights in healthcare in Ukraine, hosted by LEP’s network coordinator the Foundation for Medical Law and Bioethics.

July 2011: Land Registration in Ukraine: conducted jointly by LEP partner Land Union of Ukraine, jointly with the State Land Resource Committee and the Ministry of Justice 23

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Activity 2(d) Engaging the public in policy debates relating to specific issue areas championed by legal advocacy groups by holding public town halls, local campaigns, or other venues that allow for community involvement. LEP engaged the public in various forms—including radio call-in shows, public information and advocacy campaigns, media days, USAID days, round tables, and interactive online fora—as detailed throughout this report. In addition, LEP sponsored the following activities: o

December 2012, Week of Human Rights in Health Care: LEP partners participated in simultaneous events in several cities addressing healthcare issues in Ukraine coinciding with the Week of Human Rights.

July 2013 - March 2014, Healthcare Reform Survey: LEP’s partner, Council for Protection of Rights and Safety of Patients, completed its patient satisfaction survey with 1,000 respondents from 5 cities. Involving maternity hospitals and women’s clinics, the survey revealed a low level of awareness of medical rights among Ukrainian women. Recommendations to improve public awareness on family planning options and availability of appropriate medical services as well as controlling unofficial payments were disseminated among policymakers and civil society.

Activity 2(e) Developing network sustainability by researching and analyzing the most promising business practices and business models for organizing the work of legal advocacy groups in Ukraine and creating mechanisms and working with media to share these findings and implement such models on a national basis. The coalition model and LEP’s contributions to guide UCLA to its present state are detailed under Activity 1(b). The business model promoted by LEP for UCLA has yielded success in establishing relationships with the business sector, international donors, and mass media, as detailed below: •

•

Business: o

April 2013, LIGA: LEP’s Chief of Party Inna Topal approached LIGA Zakon with a proposal to collaborate with UCLA to their mutual benefit. LIGA maintains a searchable database of Ukrainian laws and cases, available on a subscription basis.3 Initially LIGA agreed to donate a limited subscription to UCLA. After becoming familiar with UCLA and benefitting from the publicity resulting from UCLA’s activities, LIGA donated a full subscription to its entire database to UCLA and its members.

January 2014, American Chamber of Commerce: Since joining ACC, UCLA has taken a leadership role in the Corporate Social Responsibility Committee, and has also been invited to present at ACC’s anti-corruption forum.

Private law firms: o

2011, LexJus: The recipient of LEP’s first pro bono award, Roman Shurduk, has remained intimately involved with the coalition. As UCLA’s first Chairman of the Board, Mr. Shurduk has repeatedly given media interviews, met with prospective donors, and rallied the private legal community to support UCLA.

2013, DLA Piper: UCLA invited lawyers from the world’s largest law firm to share its attitude towards pro bono activity. This initial engagement has led to an ongoing relationship, with DLA Piper providing internships to select members of UCLA’s partner student legal clinics.

http://www.ligazakon.ua/

24 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

•

International donors: o

January 2013, Amnesty International: Donated a photocopier to UCLA.

March 2014, NED: Granted UCLA $94,000 for civic and civil education activities for March - June 2014.

April 2015: Norwegian Embassy granted UCLA $25,000 for legal literacy and legal aid activity.

Mass media: o

December 2010 – November 2013, Quarterly Meetings: LEP enjoyed extensive media coverage (television, radio, and print) of each of its events, publicizing UCLA and its services, and building relationships with regional media outlets throughout Ukraine.

March 2012, PSAs: LEP created two promotional videos on the availability and quality of legal aid available through its partner LAOs. Both were broadcast free of charge on regional and national television. The client video was also shown free of charge, including its airing as an analytical program on UTR.

May 2012 – March 2014, Media Clubs/Media Days: LEP collaborated with the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine, hosting a series of media clubs in Kyiv, later rolling them out to the regions, to generate enthusiasm for covering legal aid issues. Media Clubs included a press conference, presentation of a success story from UCLA, and journalist training.

Activity 2(f) Assisting in the establishment of an institutionalized forum that brings together the representatives of legal advocacy groups with justice sector officials to regularly communicate public experiences with the courts and the justice system more broadly to practitioners. LEP utilized its quarterly meetings as an institutionalized forum bringing LAOs together with justice sector officials, including regional MOJ consultants in the trainings, engaging judges and other justice sector officials as trainers, and organizing site visits as noted under Activity 1(d) and 2(b). •

•

Quarterly Meetings: In addition to jointly participating in trainings, LEP facilitated their collaboration on presentations: o

September 2011, Lviv: LEP’s partner LAOs in L’viv jointly conducted a substantive presentation on employment law, and common issues with the local MOJ department.

September 2013, Dnipropetrovsk: UCLA and the regional branch of the MOJ jointly prepared a presentation on hhealthcare issues.

Grants: In addition, LEP facilitated deeper collaboration between its partner LAOs and the MOJ by incorporating this element in its grant selection. o

•

April – November 2013: LEP partner Goreniye and the MOJ collaborated to bring virtual consultations to villagers. Leveraged by the Gates Foundation, which donated equipment and internet connections to village libraries, Goreniye convened citizen services representatives from the regional MOJ, Pension Fund, Employment Centers, Health Departments, and NGOs to jointly respond to citizen needs on a weekly basis via Skype consultations.

MOJ Newsletters: o

April 2012-January 2014, Legal Literacy Bulletins: UCLA’s collaboration with MOJ is further evidenced in the preparation and publication of the bi-monthly publication of the MOJ newsletter. See Activity 2(b). 25

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Activity 2(g) Fostering links between issue based legal advocacy networks established in Ukraine and those in neighboring countries focused on the same subjects to share best practices and promote regional cooperation. •

NLADA: o

LEP initiated the relationship between UCLA and NLADA in March 2011, by inviting NLADA’s Vice President to Ukraine to meet with partner LAOs interested in forming a legal aid coalition. Since then NLADA has remained involved in the development of UCLA. NLADA hosted several UCLA members on study tours DC, providing a tour of their organization and hosting a roundtable discussion on organizational development matters. NLADA has continued this relationship virtually, providing insight into fundraising techniques as well as membership services.

September 2011 - May 2013: LEP promoted the application/selection of several representatives of its strongest LAO partners for participation in international visitor programs. UCLA’s eventual Board Chair, Executive Director, as well as 2 other members and LEP’s beneficiary within the MOJ have participated in international study tours with LEP’s support.

Activity 2(h) Developing a quarterly newsletter, webzines, or other means of communication that increases awareness of issues, problems and resources related to the legal issue network. In addition to the extensive legal literacy and public information activities detailed in Activity 1(e), LEP has supported several newsletters, detailed below. •

•

Quarterly Newsletters: o

February 2011 – April 2013, Visnyk: LEP published 9 editions of its quarterly newsletter, Visnyk, plus a special edition for English language readers. Each newsletter contained substantive legal updates, partner news, and training materials. The Visnyk further listed upcoming events and highlighted best practices and lessons learned from the partner experiences. Electronic copies of all issues are available on LEP’s website, www.pravovakrayina.org.ua.

June 2013-May 2014, Coalition News Digest: After registration of UCLA, the Visnyk evolved into UCLA’s own publication, as part of LEP’s efforts to build its organizational capacity. Three editions of UCLA’s News Digest has been disseminated in both Ukrainian and English to a broad group of international technical assistance programs, partner LAOs, and law firms. They are available on UCLA’s web portal, www.pravoonline.org.ua.

April 2012 – January 2014, MOJ Newsletter: LEP and the MOJ, with contributions from UCLA, published 9 editions, each with a print run of 4,000 copies. See Activity 1(e).

Websites: o

October 2011 – May 2014: Pravovakrayina: LEP’s developed its project website, www.pravovakrayina.org.ua, to attract partners, inform stakeholders of activities, improve legal literacy, and connect citizens with legal aid providers. The website has been wellutilized, recording approximately 2,500 hits per quarter. Moreover, the website also has been successful in helping citizens find LAOs: 15% of surveyed clients in FY2013 reported learning of the LAO from the internet, as compared to only 6% in FY2012. An internal portion of the website further facilitated networking among prospective partners by allowing for private communications between quarterly meetings. See Activity 1(e). Partner LAOs 26

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

also set up a Google group for internal discussions. Pravovakrayina will remain online through November 2014. o

May 2014 – indefinite, Pravoonline web portal: LEP supported UCLA’s development of a more sophisticated web portal, capable of suggesting self-help tools and automatically making client referrals to appropriate government agencies or legal aid providers depending on the nature of the search.

•

USAID: o

March-May 2013, Field Days/Mistechko USAID (USAID village): Ivano-Frankivsk LEP maintained an informational booth on the project, while its partner LAOs provided more than 100 legal aid consultations to the public at these events held in Ivano-Frankivsk and Simferopol.

2012-2013, Semi-annual LGBT Information Fairs: LEP and UCLA actively participated in these events, publicizing the special legal needs as well as offering legal aid services to this constituency.

2010-2014: LEP regularly participated in donor coordination meetings, sharing project information and updates with other USAID-funded projects.

2012-2014: LEP partners participated in international visitor programs, learning about legal aid in the U.S. as well as in the Czech Republic.

2011-2014: LEP staff attended trainings held by USAID on photo illustration techniques (November 2011), writing success stories (November 2013), and promotional techniques (February 2014).

USAID FAIR project: o

March 2011 – November 2013, Quarterly Meetings: LEP has worked extensively with USAID FAIR to engage judges and court personnel with legal aid providers, inviting them to events, and organizing site visits. FAIR personnel have also made presentations at LEP’s quarterly meetings regarding their project activities and how LEP partners can contribute.

May 2010 – May 2014, Coordination Meetings: LEP regularly attends rule of law coordination meetings, sharing its project updates and publications. LEP further gave presentations on legal developments, especially relating to the Law on Free Legal Aid, at these meetings.

USAID AgroInvest o

April 2011, Roundtable: LEP engaged experts from this project (together with MPs, the Parliamentary Secretariat, the Land Resource Committee, farmers’ associations, academics, and partner LAOs) for its roundtable on the potential for lifting the moratorium of the sale of agricultural land.

2011-2013, Information Sharing: LEP regularly engaged this project in activities relating to their mission. These ranged from inviting project experts to conduct trainings 27

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

on property issues at Quarterly Meetings, to sharing the outcomes of LEP’s public information campaigns on title registration issues in rural areas, and webinars by the Land Union of Ukraine, a prime partner of AgroInvest. •

USAID Solidarity Center: o

•

2011: LEP reached out to the Solidarity Center and its partners to engage with the employment law LAOs. LEP also assisted with finding pro bono lawyers to assist unlawfully dismissed workers in Zaporizhzhya, based on the Center’s referral.

USAID UNITER o

September 2011 – September 2013, Grant selection committee: To ensure close collaboration between projects and to take advantage of its expertise, LEP invited a staff person from USAID’s civil society project to serve on its technical evaluation committee for grant awards.

2011-2013, NGO Marketplace: When UNITER launched its NGO Marketplace, LEP helped popularize this initiative among the NGOs within its network, apprising them of the services available.

June 2013, Civil Society Festival: LEP joined in UNITER’s festivities at Mariinskiy Park in Kyiv, bringing project materials and having UCLA staff a consultation tent.

USAID Parliamentary Development Project (PDP): o

2011-2013, Donor Coordination: LEP joined with PDP hosting monthly donor coordination meetings for stakeholders working in the Democracy and Governance sector. LEP actively participated in setting agendas for these meetings, and physically hosted them on a regular basis.

PDP conducted trainings for LEP partners on problem-solving methods in legislative drafting.

International Organization for Migration (IOM): o

2012-2103: Donor Coordination: LEP facilitated coordination between LAOs and UCLA and IOM’s counter-trafficking network.

Objective 3: Develop partnerships and attract additional private resources to expand and enhance the impact of the program’s pro bono efforts. Activity 3(a) Creating a national legal sector clearing house that connects private sector lawyers with clients in need of legal assistance and provides quality and timely assistance to vulnerable underrepresented groups. LEP dedicated itself to promoting the pro bono culture in Ukraine, and providing diverse opportunities for lawyers interested in pro bono work. In the first year the LEP was successful in attracting 27 law firms; by the end of the project, LEP and UCLA had engaged more than 60 firms. LEP developed the following methods of connecting pro bono lawyers with clients: •

2010-2014, LAO referral mechanism: LEP’s web-site, www.pravovakrayina.org.ua, featured an interactive map listing more than 120 LAOs, with areas of expertise and contact information, allowing citizens to easily find resources available in their regions. LEP maintained a separate list of private attorneys interested in pro bono matters, and the type of cases they were willing to accept, on 28

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

the private section of the Pravovakrayina website. LAOs referred to this list to refer appropriate clients, or to enlist the help of private attorneys as co-counsel on particular matters. In this way, LEP ensured that limited pro bono resources were being utilized effectively and efficiently. •

2013-2014, web portal: As UCLA developed and strengthened relations with pro bono partners, LEP developed a comprehensive nation-wide legal aid web portal, www.pravoonline.org.ua, uniting different opportunities for legal aid, including self-help, and various legal aid providers. The web portal allows for automated case referrals to pro bono attorneys, matching client needs with the attorney’s specifications.

Activity 3(b) Identifying and mobilizing resources from various law firms that can be of assistance to legal advocacy organizations and networks. LEP dedicated itself to promoting the pro bono culture in Ukraine by providing diverse opportunities for lawyers interested in pro bono work. In the first year, LEP was successful in attracting 27 law firms; by theend of the project, LEP and UCLA had engaged more than 60 private lawyers in pro bono work. LEP encouraged law firms to contribute pro bono services in affiliation with partner LAOs and later with the UCLA, by reaching out to lawyers and law firms across Ukraine, discussing different types of pro bono contributions, and networking with other legal aid providers. Specific activities included: •

2011-2014, Quarterly Meetings: LEP used its quarterly meetings to attract private lawyers in the regions to pro bono opportunities. Lawyers were invited to trainings, both as participants and as trainers. In addition to its national award, LEP honored lawyers at QMs in order to recognize their pro bono efforts and stimulate interest in collaboration in regions outside of Kyiv. See Activity 3(e).

•

2011-2013, Week of Law: LEP utilized this event to attract larger law firms, affording them opportunities for younger lawyers, while garnering significant publicity. During this three-day event alone partner law firms provided consultations to more than 500 clients, addressing issues of inheritance, registration of land title, land usage rights, property rights to immoveable property, loan agreements, family law/division of property, and migrant worker rights. The market value of these donated services exceeded $40,000.

•

2011-2013 annually, Free Legal Aid Day: Initiated by the Ukrainian Bar Association in 2010, and held annually on May 25, LEP recruited 10 partner law firms, in addition to UCLA members, to support this initiative.

Activity 3(c) Assisting legal advocacy organizations to develop legal advocacy and technical skills training programs for private sector lawyers. LEP partners hosted specialized trainings that proved of interest to pro bono attorneys: •

July 2011: LEP attracted private attorneys to the training on land law reform, arranged by the Land Union of Ukraine jointly with experts from the State Cadastre and the State Registration Service.

•

April 2012: The Foundation for Medical Law and Bioethics of Ukraine engaged the Center for Medical and Pharmaceutical Law and POLAKR Law Center in its seminar series on issues of medical expertise.

Activity 3(d) Recruiting pro bono volunteers from law firms and providing

A lawyer from LEP partner law firm, Legal Consulting Center, provides consultations to people during the Week of Law on December 12, 2013.

29 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

them with training on specific legal advocacy and technical skills in the areas of law targeted by the program. LEP’s used its Quarterly Meetings to attract regional lawyers to the network of legal aid providers, including them in the substantive and technical skills trainings provided. •

2011-2013, Trainings: LEP invited regional lawyers to join LEP partners at the substantive trainings in each of its quarterly meetings.

•

2011-2013, Newsletters: In addition to making pro bono partners welcome at training events including the quarterly meetings as well as specialized seminars arranged by its partner LAOs, LEP provided its newsletter, Visnyk, which included recaps of the training presentations, updates on the law, and technical skill tips to its commercial partners.

•

2011-2013, Site Visits/Networking: LEP’s pro bono partners particularly appreciated the opportunity to join on site-visits organized in conjunction with LEP’s quarterly meetings.

Activity 3(e) Developing internship programs for private sector lawyers and pro bono competitions for law firms to develop the pro bono service culture within the country. LEP supported different forms of recognition to honor the pro bono contributions of private lawyers, and law firms, as well as to generate enthusiasm for broader participation. •

•

Pro Bono Awards: o

2011-2013: LEP instituted a formal annual ceremony to honor and publicize its partners who have shown the greatest commitment to legal aid and support of the Coalition. One award goes to an individual lawyer who has spearheaded efforts, and a second award recognizes a law firm that cumulatively has engaged the most with Coalition partners and activities. Contributions have included conducting skills training, mentor relationships with partner LAOs, as well as representing clients through the referral process. Between 2011 and 2013, LEP conducted three national award ceremonies, honoring six recipients.

2012-2014: To better engage regional lawyers, LEP instituted a pro bono award at each quarterly meeting. LEP worked with the MOJ to select lawyers at the oblast level who contributed most to providing free legal aid and sometimes serve as a reference point for MOJ-supported public legal aid offices. LEP’s recognition of these lawyers has been usually broadly covered by the local media, simultaneously bolstering the Coalition while giving pro bono partners publicity for their contributions.

Internships: o

LEP initiated a competition for student internships at its partner law firms. LEP worked closely with Kyiv-Mohyla University National University to develop the procedure and criteria for selection of students, and with partner law firms to facilitate the selection process. 

2012-2013: 2 partner law firms participated, giving internships to 2 law students;



2013-2014: 4 partner law firms participated, selecting from 25 student applications.

2013-2014, DLA Piper: Responding to the law firm’s interest, LEP coordinated a recruitment process for students from partner legal clinics to apply for an internship with DLA Piper; 3 internships were awarded. LEP further connected DLA Piper with Crimean law students following the annexation in April 2014.

30 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Activity 3(f) Generating support for legal advocacy organizations from local businesses and creating a dialogue on selected issue areas. Essential to LEP’s success in promoting UCLA’s financial independence and sustainability has been its relationship with the private sector. LEP started by cultivating businesses with a natural nexus in the legal field, gradually expanding its relationships with other companies with an interest in corporate social responsibility. •

•

LIGA, the largest provider of legal information, including comprehensive and regularly updated legislative databases in Ukraine: o

2012-2013: LIGA initially donated a subscription to its limited database to LEP partners, but expanded that subscription to its full VERDICTUM database of judicial decisions to UCLA members free of charge.

2013: LIGA Group of Companies provided lawyers to do free consultations during the Week of Law exhibition forum.

2014: LIGA supported LEP and UCLA by hosting the national web portal presentation, in addition to marketing the event to other enterprises.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Center: o

2012: LEP’s manual on international best practices on partnerships among universities and businesses was published by the CSR Center and disseminated to Ukrainian universities.

December 2012, February 2014: UCLA was invited to the CSR Marketplace, an innovative forum to share experiences and ideas and to report on successes and best practices.

American Chamber of Commerce: o

February 2014: UCLA is invited to head the CSR Committee. Together with ACC, UCLA is organizing a conference featuring LIGA, Coca-Cola, DTEK (the largest energy company in Ukraine) and other leading CSR companies for September 2014.

o June 2014: UCLA is invited to participate in an anti-corruption initiative, organized by ACC.

CROSS-CUTTING FACTORS Gender LEP incorporated gender considerations into its approach as well as in each of its activities. This was demonstrated first by the leadership of the LEP office, with the COP and DCOP both being Ukrainian women. Moreover, gender balance could be observed in LEP partners as well as in the speakers invited to participate at quarterly meetings. We further ensured that the legal aid services were equally accessible to women, resulting in a steadily increasing percentage of female clients throughout the project: FY1: 42%, FY2: 50%, FY3: 58%; and FY4: 70%. Moreover, LEP partners handled legal cases of particular relevance to women, including employment discrimination on the basis of gender, women’s health care and property rights.

Anti-Corruption Corruption remains a serious problem in Ukraine. Popular protests against the Yanukovych administration revealed extraordinary levels of graft, which pervaded local and municipal administrations as well. Ukrainians routinely are required to pay bribes to receive citizen services ranging from property registration to health care. Moreover, public trust in the justice system generally, and with courts specifically, remains 31 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

low. LEP empowered citizens by making them aware of their rights, and by providing a means of enforcing them. Through civic education, combined with accessible services, citizen are better able to demand equity and fight corruption. Moreover, LEP empowered the LAOs with which it worked, building their capacity to forcefully advocate for substantive policy reforms. Finally, as a nationwide coalition of LAOs, fortified by its association with private law firms, businesses, and media partners, the UCLA has evolved into an influential stakeholder, capable of publicizing unethical practices and illegal conduct.

METHODS OF ASSISTANCE MSI’s design of the LEP project emphasized domestic ownership and capitalizing on existing capacities. From its all-Ukrainian project staff to its commitment to established legal aid providers throughout Ukraine, LEP improved the quality and quantity of legal aid in a sustainable manner, rather than creating and funding new entities that would last only the duration of the project. As a result of intensive technical assistance, supplemented with some grant funding, LEP is gratified to see UCLA continuing to serve Ukraine’s poor, committed to ensuring that people are aware of their rights, and have the legal means of enforcing infringements. LEP offers the following retrospective on the methods of assistance and approaches used in the course of the project. Thematic Networks: LEP initially promoted three separate legal aid networks, premised upon specific areas of substantive law selected as topics most germane to legal aid clientele. This approach helped promote higher quality legal aid, as lawyers were developing expertise in a limited field. Developing greater substantive expertise, also enable the networks to more effectively advocate for policy reforms within their spheres. NGO Network Coordinators: To foster an appreciation for the benefits of working together, as well as to move the members towards a common vision of the Coalition objectives, LEP selected three leading NGOs through a competitive process to serve as network coordinators for each of the thematic networks (healthcare, employment, and property). Network coordinators were charged with recruiting appropriate LAOs with relevant substantive expertise and experience, promoting unity among the NGOs, and improving citizen services in their respective spheres. This approach had the benefit of allowing the networks a fair degree of self-determination and ownership. Network Coaches: Each substantive network was further supported by organizational development Coaches—part-time consultants enlisted by LEP to build organizational capacity with the networks. Knowing that many NGOs are reluctant to expose any organizational weaknesses to a prospective grantor, LEP utilized Coaches to create a valuable resource that was external to the grant selection process. Substantive Training: Other than in the area of healthcare law, few LAOs in Ukraine truly had substantive expertise. To promote this, LEP offered continuing legal education in each of the thematic spheres, to ensure that legal aid lawyers were well-versed on the law most pertinent to Ukraine’s poor. In addition to improving the substantive knowledge, these trainings created excellent opportunities to build relationships with key stakeholders in each field. LEP frequently used experts from governmental offices as trainers, fortifying the nexus between legal aid providers and the corresponding citizen service providers. Skills Training: Due to the relative absence of practical elements in Ukraine’s legal education system, lawyers enter the profession with limited practical skills. Since building client confidence is critical to building trust in the judicial system, LEP developed a series of skills training, starting with the initial client interview and continuing through the appeals process. This training series had the secondary benefit of promoting better relationships between LAOs and the Courts, as LEP utilized 32 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

several judges as trainers. Similarly, LEP used senior lawyers as a means of engaging private law firms in legal aid issues. Quarterly Meetings: In order to develop a truly national network of legal aid providers, LEP scheduled its quarterly meetings at regional centers throughout Ukraine. This approach also allowed LEP to highlight exceptional work done by its partners in the hosting region. Further, the Quarterly Meetings became a strong forum for engaging local policymakers, journalists, and private lawyers. Limited Grants: In order not to perpetuate LAO dependency on donor assistance, LEP deliberately allocated very limited funding to grants. However, LEP judiciously used grant funding to facilitate collaboration among LAOs by offering to fund joint initiatives amongst themselves. Whereas LAOs viewed each other competitively during the beginning stages of the project, the forced collaboration on public information and advocacy campaigns helped demonstrate the advantages of networking. Further, to promote collaborative relationships with governmental stakeholders, LEP gave preference to grant applications that engaged entities such as local justice departments and employment centers. Leveraged Funding: LEP successfully leveraged its limited funding by engaging the national and local media, the private sector, and the broader donor community. LEP was able to publicize the services available through its partner LAOs by creating news stories of interest to media outlets. Similarly, knowing that the Gates Foundation had brought internet service to village libraries, LEP partners utilized this technology to serve rural clients that would otherwise have been too costly. Finally, LEP stimulated the business community to engage in legal aid by finding mutual benefitsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; including publicity for law firms and businesses engaging in pro bono and CSR programs. LEP further helped UCLA secure outside funding directly, to ensure its continued viability upon project end. UCLA registered as a charitable organization, under the laws of Ukraine, in order to be able to offer its domestic donors a tax deduction.

33 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; June 15, 2014

PROJECT RESULTS/PERFORMANCE INDICATORS The Performance Monitoring and Evaluation data are attached to this report. MSI is pleased to note that the outputs and outcomes greatly exceeded expectations in almost all instances. Even more importantly, however, is the consistent trend demonstrated over four years of project implementation showing continuous improvement in quality of services provided as well as increased organizational capacity of UCLA.

Objective 1: Strengthen the capacity of legal advocacy organizations to effectively represent the interests of citizens. Quality of Legal Aid Increased: LEP instituted the Client Satisfaction Form (CSF) as a means of helping LAOs evaluate their services from the perspective of those being served—Do their clients understand their rights and options? Were their questions answered? Would they recommend the same lawyer to others? The CSF also provided insights into how citizens receive information, helping UCLA tailor its communication strategy to its target audience. On a scale of 1-5 (5 being highest) the average score rose from 4.4 to 4.7. Significantly, however, clients noted improvement in both the lawyers’ attitudes (level of friendliness and willingness to answer questions) as well as the clarity of the advice provided. This suggests that the trial skills training—which emphasized attorney-client relations—had a positive impact. Even more impressively, clients noted continuous improvement in the quality of the legal services received each year: 97% of clients reported that the legal aid received helped to solve their problem. Of them 69% reported that they received “complete assistance” in 2014, up from 40% in 2013. Accordingly one can reasonably conclude that LEP’s substantive training activities were also impactful, improving the quality of legal aid. A copy of the CSF can be found in Appendix 3. Quantity of Legal Aid Increased: LEP intentionally reduced the number of LAOs involved in its programming over the course of the project in order to facilitate its coalition building objective, which required a cohesive group of truly dedicated legal aid providers. Significantly, however, is the fact that even as the number of LAOs decreased, the number of clients served increased dramatically. For example, LEP worked with 81 LAOs who reported serving 590 clients in FY2011. Once LEP started its information campaigns and media engagement however, the number of clients served increased dramatically, even as the number of partner LAOs decreased. FY2012 recorded 5096 clients served by 65 LAOs; FY2013 had 43 LAOs doing 6659 consultations; and those same 43 LAOs have served another 6611 since the start of FY2014 (the final 8 months of the project.) These dramatic increases in clientele suggest that LEP’s public information campaigns not only apprised citizens of their rights, but also of the availability of quality legal aid services. Further, it is evident that LEP’s website has been a significant factor in connecting clients to legal aid providers: 15% of surveyed clients in FY2013 reported learning of the LAO from the internet, as compared to only 6% in FY2012.

Objective 2: Build a sustainable nationwide network of legal advocacy organizations that address citizen demand for legal services in specific areas of the law and leverage the work of such organizations for national reform efforts and promote broader access to justice. UCLA as a Legacy Institution: In the course of LEP’s 4-year project LAOs in Ukraine have transitioned from staunch competitors to reluctant collaborators to committed partners. With the registration of UCLA as a legal entity in May 2013, 9 LAOs demonstrated their intention to continue working together to serve the growing legal aid needs in Ukraine. Whereas LAOs initially were unwilling to refer clients or seek advice from one another in 2010, UCLA members are now jointly implementing initiatives that incorporate best practices from each other. From a position of competing for limited grant funding, UCLA members are pursuing funding opportunities on behalf of the Coalition. UCLA has already attracted funding from the National Endowment for Democracy ($94,000), the Norwegian Embassy ($25,000), and GlobeSave ($5,000); 34 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

has grant applications pending with the Dutch Embassy, the Democracy Grants program, and USAID’s FAIR project; and is in specific discussions with OSCE, the Canadian Embassy, and IFC for additional funding. When economic conditions allow, UCLA has a broader fundraising strategy that involves investment from the private sector into an endowment. UCLA’s transition from a group of organizationally discrete and geographically disparate NGOs, to a unified network is documented by the Network Sustainability Index (NSI), the monitoring tool developed by MSI to track the Coalition’s maturity as an NGO (see Annex 4). The NSI assesses an organization’s capacity to build an effective management structure, attract new members, carry out internal communications, conduct outreach, and attract funding. From a maximum score of 20, UCLA has shown steady improvement over 3 years: FY2012: 9.8; FY2013: 14.3; FY2014: 14.7. UCLA’s Leveraged Initiatives: UCLA is starting to garner recognition as experts on legal aid and related policy issues, stemming from its experience collaborating with diverse partners to leverage various initiatives. After years of supporting the MOJ’s Law Week and engaging with its regional departments throughout Ukraine, UCLA has grown into a respected partner in implementation as well as for policy initiatives. UCLA had been approached by the MOJ to develop regulatory guidelines and recommendations on registration of property rights through a participatory process in 2013; based upon the quality of this work the MOJ again sought UCLA’s help holding roundtables and developing specific recommendations on the reforming administrative services in 2014. UCLA has also emerged as a trusted partner for local officials responsible for citizen services. Rolling its “Skype in the Villages” project out to 8 oblasts, LEP successfully convened officials from the respective pension bureaus, health departments, and employment centers. LEP’s success in this realm is documented by the number of regional and national policymakers substantively engaged. In the 4 years this indicator has been tracked4, LEP has exceeded its target by a multiple of 2.5, on average: FY2010 envisioned 10 such engagements, while LEP delivered 14; F2011 targeted 5, but the project yielded 23; FY2012 projected 10 though LEP recorded 20; in the final 8 months of the project, LEP notched 16 substantive engagements—13 local and 3 national level—far exceeding the 5 originally projected.

Objective 3: Develop partnerships and attract additional private resources to expand and enhance the impact of the program’s pro bono efforts. Pro Bono Contributions: LEP successfully tapped into a previously under-utilized resource—the commercial legal sector. Both in terms of number of private lawyers/law firms engaged and the value of the services donated LEP has far exceeded expectations. Although the legal profession in Ukraine has not developed a strong pro bono culture, LEP facilitated this by providing diverse and easy opportunities to attract a variety of interest and capacity levels. From engaging private lawyers in Law Week to inviting them as trainers, to referring cases in line with the interests of specific lawyers, LEP created attractive opportunities for pro bono work. LEP then sustained the interest by providing public recognition of their efforts. In addition, LEP also brought talented law students together with law firms and has been instrumental in institutionalizing an internship program to their mutual benefit. The steady increase in number of participants and the value of contributions—both in absolute and pro rata terms—attests to the viability of LEP’s initiative. Twenty-eight law firms accounted for more than $25,000 in FY2011 while the following year the value of the contributions jumped to $45,000 while only one additional law firm participated. In its final year, LEP reached out to lawyers in the regions, working with 64 private firms, which contributed services valued at $36,790.78. Finally, LEP witnessed an increase in the number of cases handled by pro bono attorneys, from 64 in FY2011 to 174 in FY2012 to 280 in the final 8 months of the project.

LEP could not officially report on this indicator prior to project registration, so there is no data for May-September 2010.

35 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS/IMPACT LEP’s accomplishments and impact in sustainably improving access to justice by raising the quality and quantity of legal aid is documented in the previous section. However, in many ways the best measure of impact comes from the subjective accounts of LEP’s stakeholders. LEP is proud of the array of supportive feedback it has received from LAO partners, their clients, MOJ officials, judges, pro bono partners, as well as its funder, USAID. These comments demonstrate personal commitment to improving access to justice in Ukraine into the future. LAOs: Early on in the project LEP had to persuade LAOs of the benefits of networking. While this was counterintuitive for many LAOs initially, eventually LEP was able to demonstrate their collective strength. As one participant recognized: As a coalition, we managed to really move the public by our events, media-clubs. People got more information on their rights and on how to protect them. All our coalition members state that the number of people applying for legal aid has grown significantly, especially in the regions where quarterly meetings were already held. Our regional communication strategy is a part of a general communication strategy. We addressed the local newspaper with the suggestion to provide free legal consultations in it. As soon as we started, we were surprised to see how the rating of the newspaper started to grow. Of course, this success did not come unnoticed: we started to get proposals from other local media. This communication strategy has brought specific results, which led to the mutually beneficial collaboration: the media got commercial benefits, and we got social – greater access to our target audience. We strongly recommend developing a solid communication strategy to our partner organizations. Activities of an LAO should be highlighted by the press, if such a LAO is public. Its success should be made known to the residents of the region at least. - Denys Hrechko, Projects Manager at Horeniye LAO, Pavlohrad, UCLA founding member everyone who needs it can find it.” Legal Aid Clients: The ultimate beneficiary, citizens in need of legal aid, in many ways provides the true testament to LEP’s impact. By this measure, the legal services provided have changed lives: Even the strongest doors can be opened! Many people think that free cheese is only found in a mousetrap. But that is only because they did not try to take a step forward. Efficient free legal aid exists. I am grateful to the Coalition for support. These people have proven: Knock, and the door will open! You need to trust people! Real professionals do exist. Just trust and ask for help! MOJ Officials: LEP has received three commendations from the Ministry of Justice—from three different ministers--for its contributions to advancing rule of law and expanding access to justice. Collaboration between the Ukrainian Coalition for Legal Aid and public legal aid offices at the Ministry of Justice extends and prospers. Such cooperation with the NGOs providing help to the public legal aid offices proved to be extremely efficient. This model has already been implemented in… 16 oblasts.

– Oksana Yukhta, Head of MoJ’s Department for Coordination of Legal Work and Legal Education The MoJ appreciates the opportunity to refer matters to LEP’s partners and pro bono attorneys throughout Ukraine. In Kyiv we collaborate with the legal clinic at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy National University, referring appropriate cases to them. – Nina Kravchenko, Deputy Head of Kyiv Oblast Department of Justice

36 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Judges: The major objective of the judiciary is not the adoption of a respective decision, but enforcement thereof. And the lawyers should be controlling the process. – Judge Svitlana Malovichko of Zaporizhzhya Court of Appeals Pro Bono Partners: LEP has been gratified and inspired by the volunteer efforts it has managed to mobilize in the course of this project. However, we are particularly proud that our partners find it mutually beneficial. By creating win/win situations, LEP has set the groundwork for a pro bono culture: LEP gives lawyers a unique opportunity to combine their pro bono efforts with civil society legal aid providers. I am especially very thankful to LEP for the chance to share my professional experience with other colleagues and to see that I am not alone! Thanks to the LEP Team for such strong inspiration. – Vadym Halaychuk, General Director, Moor and Partners Law Group USAID: LEP has steadfastly resisted the temptation to achieve its objectives by issuing grants, and thereby perpetuating NGO dependence on international donors. Using its limited grant funding to encourage collaboration and build mutual reliance, LEP cultivated alternative ways to amplify its work, including building strong partnerships with governmental counterparts, private sector supporters, and media. We very much appreciated USAID’s recognition of our commitment to leveraging project funds: I am incredibly impressed not only by [the] wonderful work you do but by your project’s creativity and looking outside the box. – Olha Myrtsalo, USAID Senior Development and Communications Officer

37 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

ISSUES AND PROBLEMS/LESSONS LEARNED Network Building: LEP started working with three separate networks, premised on their substantive interests. This approach had both pros and cons. As a positive, building upon their common interests was a good way to facilitate team-building and expand their expertise through sharing of best practices. However, as they emerged as distinct entities, it quickly became apparent that they would wind up competing with one another for limited funding. Moreover, while individual lawyers may specialize in certain areas, it was rare to have whole LAOs that were dedicated to a narrow field. Accordingly, for both organizational and substantive reasons, LEP recommended that the three thematic networks combine to form a single legal aid coalition, with substantive divisions. This is consistent with the model employed by NLADA and has contributed to a stronger institutional framework. While LEP had hoped to include the student legal clinics as coalition members, the fact that they were not registered as NGOs (neither collectively nor individually), precluded them from registering as members of the charitable organization under Ukrainian law. However, UCLA has continued working with the association as an associate member. Project Registration: LEPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s implementation was severely delayed due to challenges in registering a foreign assistance project that is charged with working with civil society, as opposed to a governmental counterpart. The Government of Ukraine required that LEP have a governmental beneficiary in order to register, although the terms of our Cooperative Agreement foresaw only a tangential relationship with the government. LEP reached out to the MOJ, noting their interest in promoting the rule of law and ensuring that citizens have access to justice. Although it took time to negotiate their consent to sponsor the project as a governmental beneficiary, LEP is proud that the MOJ has consistently supported and applauded the project outcomes. Law on Free Legal Aid: Ukraine passed a sweeping law granting extensive rights to counsel to broad classes of citizens in administrative, civil or criminal situations. It further put the responsibility for effectuating this law upon the MOJ. Some had initially interpreted the law as putting legal aid in the exclusive domain of the MOJ, thus precluding both non-governmental organizations and private attorneys from providing legal services free of charge. However, such an interpretation is inconsistent with both the language of the Law and the Ukrainian Constitution. While decreeing sweeping rights to legal aid, the Law does not, and constitutionally could not, dictate that non-state actors are prohibited from providing legal aid. The legal aid services regulated by the Law are limited by its terms such that legal aid is funded in whole or in part from the State budget of Ukraine and so by definition, it does not apply to non-state actors. Moreover, a contrary interpretation would deprive citizens of their right to select their counsel as well as to effectively outlaw pro bono activity. Rather than supplanting the role of civil society and the private sector in providing aid to citizens, it creates an even greater need and the opportunity for state and non-state actors to collaborate in achieving the common goal of ensuring equal access to justice. In essence, the more effective legal aid by non-state actors is, the lesser the burden on the MOJ to fulfill the rights guaranteed by the Law. Accordingly, UCLA and MOJ have forged a positive working relationship towards a common public goal. Through this positive relationship, UCLA has also grown into a respected voice on policy matters. Political and Economic Crisis: In the second and third years of the project LEP had worked intensively with UCLA to develop a fundraising strategy and cultivate relationships with prospective investors in the private sector as well as with domestic foundations. LEP had developed detailed plans to establish an endowment to ensure a continuous revenue stream to support core activities. However, just as it was preparing to launch this plan, the civil unrest of November 2013 began. Amid the extraordinary events that unfolded in the ensuing months, the economic situation in Ukraine became increasingly precarious as the full extent of fraud and corruption in the Yanukovych regime was exposed. Further, the political instability and potential for more widespread violence has caused a precipitous drop in foreign investment. As a result, LEP helped UCLA adapt its fundraising strategy to one that while still largely reliant on international donor funding, is considerably more diversified. Moving away from applying for spot grants to fund discrete activities, UCLA is presenting its portfolio of work to donors and seeking their buy-in to sustain those activities. Thus far, UCLA has garnered genuine interest from NED, several embassies, OSCE, and most recently from IFC who is interested in its work on property registration. llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 38 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; June 15, 2014

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Ukrainian Coalition for Legal Aid (UCLA) is providing legal aid to thousands of Ukrainians in need. Previously focusing on property, employment and healthcare rights, since November 2013, UCLA has added civil rights cases—counseling people being coerced by the government for participating in the protests, as well as exposing fraudulent business practices by government officials. Although the violence will hopefully soon be quelled, the demands for legal aid are now even more acute as Ukraine struggles to develop a society premised on the rule of law and access to justice. UCLA’s contributions to these efforts relate to increasing legal literacy, serving legal aid clients who have suffered civil rights violations, and building citizen confidence in their government as the conduit that allows citizens to claim their rightful benefits. UCLA has made tremendous progress towards full sustainability in a very short time. However, the political and economic crisis has retarded its progress. With several grants and grant applications in the pipeline, UCLA will continue its work for at least the next several months. However, continuing to promote the Coalition and position it for new funding opportunities requires time, and funding. To help UCLA take this final step to become truly sustainable indefinitely, it will require some funding to support a modest office and minimal staff, serving as UCLA’s Secretariat. UCLA’s Chairman of the Board remains committed to the Coalition, as do several of the consultants and volunteers who have contributed to its success thus far. For relatively little investment, over a 1-2 year period, UCLA could solidify the significant gains it has already achieved. UCLA’s Secretariat, consisting of an Executive Director, a Fundraiser, a Communications Advisor, and an Accountant would enable it to consolidate the gains made thus far and transform UCLA into a true legacy organization.

39 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

ANNEX 1: LIST OF LEP PRO BONO PARTNERS 1. ЮФ "Центр медичного та фармацевтичного права"

03056, м. Київ,Чоколівський (044) 585 06 31, 050 691 8576, бульвар, 42-а, оф. 135, секція antbarrister@medlawcenter.com.ua 050 441 8615 А, 03087

2. ЮФ "Центр правового консалтингу"

м. Київ, вул. Саксаганського, (044) 219 18 17 121, оф. 1

office@cpk.ua

3. ЮФ "CMS Cameron McKenna"

вул. Володимирська 38, 6-й (044) 391-3377 поверх

serhiy.gryshko@cms-cmck.com

4. ЮФ "Моор і Партнери"

вул. Гоголівська 23

(044) 482-0034

halaychuk@moor.com.ua

5. Юридична група "ЛексЮс"

пров. Козловського 4, оф.11

(067) 236 5546

shurduk@lexjus.com.ua

6. Адвокатська компанія "С.Т.Партнерс"

вул. Саксаганського, 135/13, Тел.: +380 44 234 4097, s.tyurin@stpartners.com.ua офіс 23, м. Київ, 01032, Тел./факс: +380 44 289 9850 Україна

7. Приватне юридичне підприємство "Полакр"

95011, АРК, г.Симферополь, 050-497-80-81 ул. Турецкая, д.12, оф.15

polakr@medpravo.com.ua

8. ЮФ "Spenser&Kauffmann"

вул. Панфілівців, 3

v.zagariya@sklaw.com.ua

9. Юридична компанія «Олексій Пуха і Партнери» 10. Адвокатська група "Солодко та партнери"

(044) 288-83383

066-310-4668 puhaipartnery@gmail.com м. Київ, вул. Кудрявська, 23а

044 272 067 187 87 87

evgeniy@solodko.kiev.ua

40 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

11. МЮГ "АстаповЛоєрс"

Бізнес-центр «Європа», пров. (044) 490 70 01 Музейний, 4, 3-й поверх

12. ЮФ "Василь Кісіль і Партнери"

вул. Б. Хмельницького 17/52(044) 581-7777 А, м. Київ

pogorelova@vkp.kiev.ua

13. Адвокатське об'єднання "Українська рада адвокатів"

м. Київ, вул. Шота Руставелі, (044) 361-2645 44, офіс 22

ukradvokat888@gmail.com'

14. Аудиторська фірма "ЕККАУНТ"

т: +38 044 528 Червоноармійська, 97, офіс 3 т/ф: +38 044 529 Київ, 03150, Україна м: +38 093 364 8800

15. ЮФ «Семенова і Партнери»

Пр. Ген. Острякова, 54, м. Севастополь, +380 692 44-02-66 АР Крим, 99029, Україна 044 230 044 502 82 28

8486 6332 oleksii@acaudit.com.ua

info@semenova-partners.com 21

16. Адвокатська компанія "Прайм"

м. Київ

17. Адвокатське обєднання "Актіо"

Київ, Харків 01033, м. Київ, вул. 044 289-44-08 Паньківська, 25,

info@actio.com.ua

18. Юридичне бюро "Дерев'янчук та Партнери"

04053 м. Київ, Воровського, 8-а оф. 2

a.zagura@vdp.com.ua

19. Юридична фірма "Бондарчук і Партнери"

Україна, 04053, м. Київ, (044) 531 19 24, Факс: (044) 220 bp@bp.net.ua Саксаганского, 101, офіс 3 52 30

20. ЮК "Бабич и партнеры"

03055, м. Київ, просп. (044) 238-00-03 Перемоги 21-А (літера "А"), (063) 710-70-95 (приватний) офіс 1

вул.

044 272-50-72

legal@kac.relc.com

gordienkoas@ukr.net

41 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

21. Юридична фірма «AGRECA»

Моб: +380 50 351 Київ 01021, Україна, вул. Тел: +380 44 492 Інститутська, 19-Б, 2-й поверх Факс: +380 44 492 2877

22. Адвокатське об'єднання «Arzinger»

01032 Київ, Україна, БізнесTeл.: +38 (044) 390 55 33 центр «Евразія», вул. assistant5@arzinger.ua Фaкс. +38 (044) 390 55 40 Жилянська, 75, 5-й поверх

23. Юридична фірма “Вронський, Вронська та Партнери“

01011, Київ, вул. Мирного, 8, оф. 4

24. Юридична компанія "Астерс"

Бізнес-центр "Леонардо", 14 поверх Тел. +380 44 230 вул. Богдана Хмельницького, Факс +380 44 230 6001 19-21 Київ 01030, Україна

25. Юридична фірма "Куцак і Партнери"

Україна,м. Чернівці, вул. 380 (50) 670-39-56; +380 (372) Головна, 122-А Бізнес центр 900510@rambler.ru 90-05-10 «Квадрат» офіс 215, 216

26. ТОВ Консалтингова компанія "Наша справа"

01011, Київ, вул. Мирного, 8, оф. 4

27. Юридична компанія "DLA Piper Ukraine LLC"

03150, м. Київ, Червоноармійська, 77A,

28. Юридична компанія "МедАдвокат"

м. Київ

Панаса

6094 2876 marina.sharapa@agreca.com.ua

+38 044 569 03 05

6000

oleksiy.didkovskiy@asterslaw.com

00 38 044 569 03 05

вул. T +380 44 490 9575; F +380 44 clare.titcomb@dlapiper.com 490 9577; M +380 50 732 4715 T +380 66 740 9005

olenabedenko@ukr.net

42 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

ANNEX 2: LIST OF UCLA CLEARINGHOUSE REGIONAL LAW FIRM PARTNERS 1. Адвокат Заболотний Антон Миколайович - м. Хмельницький 2. Адвокат Весна Наталія Олександрівна – м. Хмельницький 3. Юридична компанія «ITorderliness» – м. Харків 4. Адвокатське обєднання "Білоцерківська адвокатська контора" - м. Біла Церква Київська обл. 5. Адвокат Булаєнко Олексій Казімірович - м. Кам'янець-Подільський Хмельницька обл. 6. Адвокат Шумейко Володимир Петрович - м. Кам'янець-Подільський Хмельницька обл. 7. Адвокат Хлімоненкова Марина Вячеславівна - м. Кам'янець-Подільський Хмельницька обл. 8. Асоціація юристів м. Кам'янець-Подільського 9. Правнича компанія "Іван Ватутін і Партнери" – м. Івано-Франківськ 10. Адвокат Поздняков Сергій Генріхович - м. Харків 11. Адвокат Кононенко Валерій Петрович - м. Харків 12. Юрист Москальчук Віталій Іванович - м. Вознесенськ 13. Адвокат Ярош Василь Юрійович – м. Хмельницький 14. Приватне підприємство «Юридична агенція Магістр» - м. Хмельницький 15. Адвокат Храпач Олександр Сергійович - м. Зіньків Полтавська обл. 16. Юрист Бінько Сергій Сергійович - м. Вознесенськ 17. Адвокат Швець Василь Степанович - м. Вознесенськ 18. Адвокатське бюро «Бюро адвоката Єлова» - м. Луцьк 19. Адвокат Козюра Андрій Григорович - м. Луцьк 20. Адвокат Коваленко Євгенія Вікторівна - м. Луцьк 21. Адвокат Нарбут Тетяна Миколаївна - м. Луцьк 22. Адвокат Спіріна Юлія Петрівна - м. Луцьк 23. Адвокат Повх Олександр Максимович - м. Луцьк 24. Адвокат Трофимов Олександр Георгійович - м. Чернігів 25. Адвокат Кутуков Сергій Олександрович - м. Чернігів 26. Адвокат Якуба Галина Олександрівна - м. Чернігів 27. Адвокат Свірець В'ячеслав Володимирович - м. Рівне 28. Адвокат Лозінський Микола Володимирович - м. Хмельницький 29. Адвокат Ільків Олег Богданович – м. Львів 30. Адвокат Лозан Сергій Іванович – м. Львів 31. Благодійна організація "Твоє право" – м. Львів 32. Адвокат Бойко Валерій Федорович - м. Нетішин Хмельницька обл. 43 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

33. Адвокат Савінський Олег Петрович – м. Хмельницький 34. Адвокат Моісеєв Юрій Олександрович – м. Хмельницький 35. Адвокатська контора «Місяць та партнери» - м. Хмельницький 36. Юридична фірма "Куцак і Партнери" - м. Чернівці 37. ЮФ "Центр правового консалтингу" - м. Київ 38. Юридична компанія "МедАдвокат" - м. Київ 39. ЮФ "Центр медичного та фармацевтичного права" - м. Київ 40. Адвокатське об'єднання "Українська рада адвокатів" - м. Київ 41. Юридична компанія "DLA Piper Ukraine LLC" - м. Київ 42. Юридична група "ЛексЮс" - м. Київ

44 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

ANNEX 3: CLIENT SATISFACTION FORM МИ ЦІНУЄМО ВАШУ ДУМКУ! 1. Звідки Ви дізнались про приймальню? Будь ласка, оберіть та позначте всі варіанти, які Вам підходять. o від знайомих/сусідів/співробітників o оголошення у місцевій газеті o оголошення по місцевому радіо o оголошення у вигляді листівки на роботі/громадському місці o оголошення представників НУО під час публічного заходу o з Інтернет o інше (будь ласка, уточніть)_____________________________ 2.

Що Ви очікували отримати в результаті звернення до організації? 1 - я хотів отримати інформацію щодо існуючої проблеми 2 - я хотів отримати юридичну консультацію щодо існуючої проблеми 3 - я хотів, щоб хтось допоміг мені вирішити існуючу проблему 4 - я хотів дізнатись про послуги, що можуть допомогти мені вирішити існуючу проблему 5 - я хотів порадитись із юристом 6 - інше (будь ласка, уточніть) _________________________________________________

3. Наскільки легко було отримати послугу в організації? (включаючи всі шляхи отримання послуги: телефон, електронна пошта, факс, візит до офісу). Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 – дуже важко 2 – важко 3 – скоріше важко ніж легко 4 - легко 5 - дуже легко 6 – важко відповісти Прокоментуйте Вашу відповідь, будь ласка: ____________________________________________________ 4. Представник організації був дружнім та готовим відповісти на питання. Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 - повністю не погоджуюсь 2 - не погоджуюсь 3 – скоріше не погоджуюсь ніж погоджуюсь 4 – погоджуюсь 5 - повністю погоджуюсь 6 - важко відповісти 5. Представник організації, з яким я спілкувався, зрозумів мою проблему та зміст інформації, якої я потребував. Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 - повністю не погоджуюсь 45 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

2 – не погоджуюсь 3 – скоріше не погоджуюсь ніж погоджуюсь 4 – погоджуюсь 5 - повністю погоджуюсь 6 - важко відповісти 6. Будь ласка, уточніть тип правової допомоги, яку Ви отримали в організації. Позначте всі варіанти відповідей 1 - консультація 2 - підготовка документів 3 - представлення клієнта у суді та інших органах влади 4 - інше (будь ласка, уточніть)______________________________________ 7. Я знаю, що я маю робити та до кого звернутись, якщо потребуватиму більше допомоги. Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 - повністю не погоджуюсь 2 – не погоджуюсь 3 – скоріше не погоджуюсь ніж погоджуюсь 4 – погоджуюсь 5 - повністю погоджуюсь 6 - важко відповісти 8. Отримана інформація була зрозумілою для мене. Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 - повністю не погоджуюсь 2 – не погоджуюсь 3 – скоріше не погоджуюсь ніж погоджуюсь 4 – погоджуюсь 5 - повністю погоджуюсь 6 - важко відповісти 9. Наскільки швидко Вами було отримано відповідь щодо Вашої проблеми від юридичного консультанта після звернення до організації? Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 – одразу 2 - протягом дня 3 - протягом тижня 4 - інше (уточніть, будь-ласка) __________ 10. Юридичний консультант, з яким я спілкувався, відповів на всі мої питання. Позначте лише один варіант відповіді. 1 - повністю не погоджуюсь 2 – не погоджуюсь 3 – скоріше не погоджуюсь ніж погоджуюсь 4 - погоджуюсь 5 - повністю погоджуюсь 6 – важко відповісти 46 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

11. Наскільки отримана правова допомога допомогла у вирішенні Вашої проблеми? 1 – зовсім не допомогла 2 – не допомогла 3 – скоріше не допомогла ніж допомогла 4 – допомогла 5 – повністю допомогла 6 – важко відповісти 12.

Чи звертались Ви раніше за отриманням безоплатної правової допомоги?  Так  Ні

12а. Якщо так, будь ласка, вкажіть організацію/веб-сторінку, яку Ви відвідували для отримання правових послуг: ________________________________________________________________________________ _________ ОСОБИСТА ІНФОРМАЦІЯ Місце проживання (місто/село): ___________________________ Ваша стать: o чоловіча o жіноча Ваша зайнятість: o навчаюсь o працюю на державній роботі o безробітний o пенсіонер o інше______________

Ваш вік: o до 18 o 18-35 o 35-55 o більше 55

Чи плануєте Ви скористатись правовими послугами знову?  Так відповісти

 Ні

 Важко

Чи плануєте Ви рекомендувати організацію, що надала Вам правові послуги, своїм друзям?  Так  Ні  Важко відповісти ВАШІ КОМЕНТАРІ ТА РЕКОМЕНДАЦІЇ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ _________________ Дата

заповнення:

_______________ 47

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

ANNEX 4: NETWORK SUSTAINABILITY INDEX Network Sustainability Index Assessment of network sustainability shall be done from two angles. First – from “inside the coalition” and second – “from the outside”. In each of the two cases assessment shall be done from the standpoint of triangulation of data, based on three criteria. Each of the criteria shall be assessed in the quadratic system, due to the Jungian quarter archetype, which is perceived as holistic and integral. Qualitative characteristics to each of the criteria shall be given within the unit of 1, however, the step shall be 0.25 to ensure greater flexibility of the assessment system, which will take into account specific features of certain coalition. Coalition’s Internal Environment Criteria 1. Openness of the Coalition – Limits up to which a coalition allows individuals, agencies and organizations to collaborate to maximize benefits and minimize duplication for different coalition members. 0,25

0,5

Coalition is a closed club of organizations that intentionally do not extend the limits of a coalition and do not engage with the new members.

0,75

Coalition is a closed club of organizations that do not realize the need to engage with the new members.

1,25

1,5

Coalition is closed, however some of its members realize the need to engage with the new members, which calls for action.

1,75

Coalition strives to become open and works inside the coalition to develop common vision as to the openness of the coalition to the society.

2,25

2,5

Coalition actively engages with new members, however, the coalition have not developed common vision as to who should be the member of the coalition.

2,75

Coalition intentionally and actively engages with the new members. Rules and procedures for engaging new members have been identified.

3,25

3,5

Coalition is open and actively works to engage with the new organizations that represent three sectors of the society.

3,75

Coalition is open and consists of organizations that represent three sectors of the society, and is capable of independently attracting funding for coalition activities and perform such activities.

48 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Criteria 2. Organizational Capacity of the Coalition Itself – Existence of efficient governance system, introduction of administrative procedures, existence of common objective, capability to attract additional funding 0,25

0,5

Coalition exists formally, only several individuals or organizations are active.

0,75

Coalition exists only due to the organization assigned “from above” – the coalition coordinator. If the coordinator is passive, the coalition disintegrates.

1,25

1,5

Coalition members realize the need for common objective and for introduction of certain rules and procedures for sustainable existence of the coalition.

1,75

Coalition members realize the need for the development and introduction of certain rules and procedures for sustainable existence of the coalition and act to implement such procedures.

2,25

2,5

Coalition developed its procedures and rules, which, however, do not completely meet the requirements to ensure coalition sustainable activities.

2,75

3,25

3,5

Coalition rules procedures efficient governance.

uses Coalition uses and democratic for rules and procedures for efficient governance. Organizational Certain coalition capacity is still members dependent of the attract funding Crises arise that authority of the and engage encourage constant coalition leader. with new revision of rules and coalition procedures. members for collaboration.

3,75

Coalition organizational culture is the guarantee to overcome crises within the coalition. Coalition demonstrates capability to adopt well-informed coalition decisions in crisis situations. System for attracting funding for coalition projects is in place and operational.

Criteria 3. Capacity to Institutionalization – Capability to implement coalition initiatives into the organizations that are coalition members 0,25

0,5

0,75

1,25

1,5

1,75

2,25

2,5

2,75

3,25

3,5

3,75

49 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Coalition member organizations consciously do not equalize their activities and the coalition activities.

Coalition member organizations unconsciously do not equalize their activities and the coalition activities.

Coalition members realize the need to integrate their activities with coalition activities.

Coalition members realize their involvement with the coalition, however fail to act.

Coalition initiatives are perceived sometimes/rather as an obligation, and often are not implemented by coalition members.

Coalition initiatives are perceived as mandatory by all coalition members.

Coalition members clearly realize their involvement with the coalition and try to implement its initiatives.

Coalition members plan their further activities with consideration of coalition activity plans.

Coalition’s Internal Environment Criteria 1. Coalition Accessibility – Limits up to which the coalition has made its resources available to public. 0,25

0,5

Accessibility of the coalition is restricted both by lack of information on the coalition and limited area of its member organizations.

0,75

Coalition realizes the need to extend territorially and attract significant information resource to inform public of the available services.

1,25

1,5

Coalition started to work to extend its availability and accessibility in all regions of Ukraine, and have started to develop information campaign for the coalition and not for its separate member organizations.

1,75

2,25

2,5

Coalition activities are concentrated mostly in oblast centers and covers territorially about 30% of population.

Accessibility of coalition’ services is limited by regions where coalition member organizations are active, and cover Developed territorially more than information 50% of the campaigns do not population of have constant Ukraine. objective and impact on the public. Information campaigns have certain strategy and certain influence on the public, and form

2,75

Coalition activities cover more that 75% of the population of Ukraine territorially. Coalition uses significant informational resource to ensure free access to its services by population.

3,25

3,5

3,75

Coalition Each citizen in members are need for legal available in all support can oblasts of easily have it Ukraine. due to coalition activities Coalition regardless of efficiently uses the place of informational residence.. resource to ensure free access to its services.

50 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

the realization of possibility of free access to coalition’s services.

Criteria 2. Coalition Efficiency – Degree of positive feedback regarding the coalition obtained from beneficiaries who benefited from the coalition activities. 0,25

0,5

Beneficiaries do not see the reason to apply for the coalition’s services.

0,75

Beneficiaries after applying to the coalition consider time for getting the service wasted and apply to different institutions for the same service.

1,25

1,5

Beneficiaries after applying to the coalition are not satisfied by the level of services, but lack opportunity to get paid services, so come back again.

1,75

Beneficiaries get benefits from the coalition, however their expectations are not always met completely.

2,25

2,5

Beneficiaries get benefits from the coalition, but do not want to apply for services repeatedly.

2,75

Benefits from coalitions meet the expectations of beneficiaries completely, if needed they are ready to apply to the coalition again.

3,25

3,5

Benefits from the coalition exceed the expectations of beneficiaries.

3,75

Satisfaction from high-quality services encourages beneficiaries to recommend the coalition independently, spread information on the coalition services.

Criteria 3. Influence onto the Public – Limits to which the coalition authorizes the community to extend its initiatives by community empowerment (development of community capacity) and development of community. 0,25

0,5

0,75

1,25

1,5

1,75

2,25

2,5

2,75

3,25

3,5

3,75

4 51

The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 – June 15, 2014

Complete lack of influence from the coalition to the community, coalition is perceived rather negatively or neutrally.

Direct influence on to the community by the coalition is absent, coalition is perceived by the community as positive or neutral.

Coalition realize the need to form influence onto the community, however, focus is made on the coalitionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own capacity only.

Singular instances of support to coalition initiatives by state authorities or local government exist.

Coalition members partner with local authorities or local governments to implement common initiatives, but lack focus on involvement of community to implementation of joint projects.

Coalition, in partnership with local authorities or local governments implements joint initiatives and involve community to perform certain actions or tasks.

Coalition has sustainable influence onto its community, in the first turn by support, including financial, from the community.

Coalition and community have sustainable mutual influence, ensuring harmonized development of the community.

52 The Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment Project in Ukraine, Final Report, May 5, 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; June 15, 2014