2025 was a year of growth and rethinking for the Transparent Cities program. We completed the multi-year cycle of developing the City Transparency Ranking and began work on the European City Index—a new research format for assessing how ready Ukrainian municipalities are for European integration.

Throughout the year, our team combined research, analytics, and hands-on engagement with local self-government bodies. We refined our approaches to assessing the quality of governance practices, taking into account the challenges of war and the need for recovery and European integration.

Below, we take a closer look at what we managed to accomplish over the past year.

City Transparency Ranking 2024

In May 2025, we presented the results of the Transparency Ranking of 100 cities.

After a two-year pause and a period of adaptive assessment of cities in 2022–2023, the Ranking returned with updated logic and approaches that made it possible to assess the work of city councils in wartime as accurately as possible.

Our analysts reviewed the assessment areas and criteria, increased the number of indicators, reinstated public score awarding, and revised the list of cities—adding 22 new ones.

Key findings of the Ranking:

• the study clearly demonstrated that cities have adapted to the war, but it also highlighted the gap between formal and actual transparency;
• most cities remain in the low or medium transparency zone, while some cities show progress even under difficult security conditions;
• the old format of annual ranking revealed its limitations, which became the basis for transitioning to a new assessment format.

Thematic studies

In 2025, our team carried out six standalone thematic studies.

30 mayors ignored the law and failed to report to their communities

Analysts assessed how the heads of 100 cities reported on their work for 2024. The findings showed that 70 mayors published reports, but only 24 provided an opportunity for the public to ask questions. Following the program’s recommendations, the Khust and Kalush city councils organized a public report by the mayor in the recommended format: with advance notice, an open meeting with the public, and subsequent publication of the materials. During the reporting, local government representatives noted that their initial plan had been to publish only the written report. Korostyshiv, Mukachevo, and Podilsk city councils confirmed their readiness to take the program’s recommendations into account in future reporting and to enhance open dialogue with residents. We will continue to study this topic and develop recommendations for cities to help them improve accountability through more open reporting formats.

Every fourth city without an elected mayor

We found that in 24 of Ukraine’s 100 largest cities, the duties of the mayor are performed by officials who were not elected (most often city council secretaries), and in two additional cities powers are split among other officials. Analysts also identified issues with informing residents: some city councils either do not update information about the current leadership on their official websites or place it in ways that are not intuitive to find. As a result, we prepared a set of recommendations for cities aimed at ensuring information is up to date, making staffing changes transparent, and ensuring clear public communication amid governance turbulence.

Access to city council sessions: can residents actually attend?

Our experts analyzed how city councils in 100 cities ensure citizens’ right to access plenary sessions. Only 10 cities had a clearly defined and publicly available access procedure and did not require complex or non-transparent processes to attend sessions. At the same time, five city councils explicitly restricted public access to sessions at the level of their rules of procedure, and in most communities the participation rules were either unclear or effectively made residents’ attendance impossible. The results confirmed that the access issue is systemic and is often linked not to security restrictions, but to the lack of clear and up-to-date rules.

Video recordings of city council sessions: how cities comply with legal requirements

Analysts examined how 100 city councils comply with updated legal requirements (effective as of August 15, 2024) on video recording and publishing session footage. Following the legislative update, cities made noticeable progress: the number of councils that did not publish any videos dropped from 23 (as of January 1, 2025) to six within six months, and 78 out of 100 councils were publishing more than 80% of recordings or streams by mid-August 2025. The findings provided grounds for further communication with city councils and the media that compliance is not only about having video, but also about its real accessibility for residents. This includes timely publication, clear titles, adequate recording quality that allows viewers to understand the context of discussion and identify speakers, a structured archive, and links to the session date and number—elements that enable citizens to genuinely track decisions and participate in local governance.

How cities report on humanitarian aid

We found that only six out of 100 cities publish the full set of required information (a consolidated report, distribution principles/criteria, and relevant data for the public): Drohobych, Zaporizhzhia, Lozova, Mykolaiv, Chernivtsi, and Shostka. Fifteen cities published an annual consolidated report on types and volumes of aid, while only 12 published the list of recipients with USREOU codes. The study showed that in most communities, information on humanitarian aid is presented in fragments and without transparent distribution rules, creating risks for trust and coordination with donors.

How city councils respond to residents: a review of social media and hotlines

We tested a “mystery check” format to assess how effectively cities respond to residents through basic communication channels—Facebook and hotlines. The results were disappointing: out of 60 comments on social media, city councils responded to only seven, and in 20 cities it took almost 60 calls to obtain even basic information by phone. Some cities responded to the findings with practical steps. In particular, the mayor of Varash supported the idea of setting out phone-response algorithms, and the Kyiv City Council took the study results into work to improve communication on social media.

European City Index

The program launched a new research format—the European City Index—which became a logical next stage in the development of the Transparent Cities program.

The European City Index makes it possible to:

• move to block-based analysis of transparency and accountability;
• assess city practices for compliance with EU requirements and the European integration process.

In 2025, we presented the results of the first two research modules and provided tailored recommendations to 11 municipalities that participated in the study, along with general recommendations for the other 89 cities.

Consultations and engagement with local authorities

Since the start of 2025, our team held three online events with more than 370 participants, as well as three offline events in Zhytomyr, Rivne, and Lutsk. These events served as platforms for discussing research findings and practical steps to strengthen transparency and accountability at the local level.

We delivered more than 50 consultations to local self-government bodies on changes to the methodology, the results of the 2024 Ranking, recommendations for meeting specific indicators, inter-municipal cooperation, training opportunities, and the implementation of transparency best practices.

With our support, representatives of city councils also had the opportunity to attend the Transparency School on Integrity (Anti-Corruption School) in Vilnius, where they were able to strengthen their competencies in transparency and anti-corruption.

 In addition, our experts prepared nine analytical briefs for the NACP on the state of transparency and accountability in specific cities and in the Kyiv region. Their recommendations were presented directly to city leadership.

Communications and public presence

Throughout the year, the program focused on systematically communicating research findings.

• the media referenced our research and analytical materials more than 1,200 times;
• most frequently in April, following the publication of the 2024 Ranking results;
• the team provided 13 expert comments to the media;
• our team took part in the 14th Civil Society Forum.

Plans

In 2026, our team will continue piloting the European City Index and will consistently publish results by sections covering different areas of city governance. In the summer, we will present the final product, which will serve as the basis for further scaling the research and deepening cooperation with city councils.

In addition, we will continue conducting standalone thematic studies focused on 50 and 100 cities from a pre-established list in order to promptly highlight successful practices, risks, and problem areas. The team will also focus on hands-on support for communities by delivering training events, providing tailored and general recommendations, and supporting the implementation of effective transparency and accountability practices.

We are grateful to the Armed Forces of Ukraine for enabling us to continue working; to the city councils that listen to our recommendations and are ready to strengthen transparency; and to the civic and international organizations helping build municipal capacity.