UKRAINE Capacity & Vulnerability Assessment Toretsk Municipality, Government Controlled Area November-December 2018 Introduction Methodology Armed conflict between the forces of the significantly. The assessment began with a secondary The populations of interest in this study are: Government of Ukraine (GoU) and opposition data review in order to identify the main internally displaced persons (IDPs), non- This Capacity and Vulnerability Assessment groups in the territory of Donbas will enter its service providers in the raion. REACH used displaced populations and service providers (CVA) monitors and analyses the challenges sixth year in 2019. The conflict is concentrated geospatial data from the main mapping in Toretsk Municipality. The research used identified during the Area-Based Assessment around the contact line separating the services in Ukraine to map the settlements of a stratified random sample with four strata (ABA) of July 20173. The key issues identified government controlled area (GCA) from the assessed area and identify the locations (Table 1). by the ABA of Toretsk were distance, cost of non-government controlled area (NGCA) of of service providers and catchement areas of transport and security risks while accessing The HH survey component of primary Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.1 these providers. services. Using a network approach, this study data collection included 769 in-person HH The Municipality of Toretsk, officially known as also maps the basic service delivery capacities Primary data collection was conducted from interviews across settlements of Toretsk the Toretsk City Council2, is located along the at the facility level and access to services at 30th Nov – 14th Dec 2018, and included key Municipality located in the GCA. The sample contact line in the GCA of the Donetsk oblast. the household (HH) level in order to identify informant interviews (KIIs), community key is statistically representative of HHs in each In 2014, the main city of the area, Toretsk, barriers to service delivery and vulnerabilities informant interviews (CKIIs), Focus Group of the assessed strata with a 95% confidence experienced significant armed conflict resulting relating to household access. Discussions (FGDs) with enumerators, interval, and a 7% margin of error. Note that in the destruction of the city council building as and HH surveys. KIIs were conducted with findings from smaller subsets may have a The basic services assessed in this CVA well as serious damage to infrastructure and representatives of service providers in Toretsk lower level of confidence and a wider margin are: education, healthcare, social, and civil housing. At the time of this assessment Municipality to assess the impact of the of error. administrative services, and food markets, (Nov-Dec 2018), some settlements continued conflict on service provision and identify any non-food item (NFI) markets, construction Limitations to be exposed to regular shelling, creating markets, banks, ATMs, post offices, and current challenges faced in providing services. ongoing security concerns for the local Some KIs interviewed were not working pharmacies. Data is disaggregated by rural REACH conducted HH surveys to assess population. for their facility in 2013 and hence were and urban areas as well as whether a facility perceptions of changes in the availability and unaware of the issues faced at that time. Before the conflict, in order to access basic or household is within 5km of the contact line quality of services since 2013. Following field Consequentially, in those cases, comparisons services, people often travelled using (5km) or beyond 5km of the contact line (>5km). visits, enumerators participated in workshops of the humanitarian situation in 2013 and 2018 convenient rail connections to large hubs The study further compares perceptions of in order to share their direct observations were a challenge. On questions related to the such as Horlivka and Donetsk, now both in the change in service provision and access of the conditions of each facility. The data provision of services, some responses may be the NGCA. By 2018, Toretsk had become from 2013 to 2018. The findings will be used collection for CKIIs used a purposive sampling slightly under-reported as respondents may one of the biggest cities located in proximity to inform humanitarian and development aid method. Pensioners, strategic professionals have believed it would increase their likelihood to the contact line, consequently the pressure providers in their support of basic service and service providers were interviewed: of receiving assistance, especially at a facility on service providers in this area increased delivery. three in rural and five in urban settlements. CKIs reported on the community’s access to level regarding the availability of equipment. Primary data collection methods Table 1. HH survey sample services and the occurrence of shelling in their To mitigate this potential bias, REACH Household (HHs) Surveys 769 Stratum 1 Stratum 2 Sample size community. Using a network approach, REACH enumerators briefed respondents prior to data Urban* 5km 206 also mapped perceptions of change of HHs’ collection that participating would not directly lead to humanitarian assistance. In addition, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) 81* Urban >5km 200 access to services, comparing perceptions of access in 2013 to access in 2018, identifying responses regarding security incidents and Key Informant Interviews Rural 5km 190 extra burdens on service providers. Annex A shortages may potentially be under reported Community (CKIIs) 62 Rural >5km 173 contains a more detailed methodology note on due to the normalisation of security issues as Workshops with enumerators 20 *Note: settlements in Ukraine are officially classified as “village,” “urban- the network approach employed. a result of the protracted nature of the conflict. type village,” or “city.” This assessment classifies villages as rural and *Some key informants were interviewed regarding multiple facilities urban-type villages/cities as urban. 1 Map 1. Assessed Settlements in Toretsk Municipality Berestok Bila Hora Kodema Slovianskyi raion Luhanska oblast Ivanopillia Kurdiumivka Mykolaivka Bakhmutskyi raion Popasnianskyi Druha Stepanivka Donetska oblast raion Dyliivka Bakhmutskyi raion Pleshchiivka Kostiantynivskyi raion Dobropilskyi Nelipivka Ozarianivka raion Dacha Pokrovskyi raion Kostiantynivskyi Dyliivka NGCA raion Yablunivka Yasynuvatskyi raion Dachne Yablunivka Kleban-Byk Yablunivka Hladosove Travneve Katerynivka Oleksandro-Kalynove Krymske Druzhba Zaitseve Holmivskyi Pivnichne Shcherbynivka Toretsk Maiorske Kostiantynivskyi Petrivka raion Shumy 4+9+7+5+2+3 Leonidivka Pivdenne Romanivka Zalizne Zoria Settlements Nelipivka Assessed Not assessed Yasynuvatskyi raion No data Hnativka Horlivka Toretsk Urban Shumy Rural Stara Sukha Balka Novhorodske Horlivska Mykolaivka AssessmeHorlntivka failure reason: Security issues 2+11+6+5+4+3 Valentynivka Yurivka Checkpoint Contact Line (OCHA, as of August 2018) Kalynove 5km area Panteleimonivka Shyroka Balka NGCA Toretsk city council 0 12345 Km Oleksandropil 2 W Population The residents of Toretsk Municipality Figure 1. Population geographic distribution Map 2. Population (estimated population - 68,636 people) face consistent conflict-related challenges as the Kurdiumivka proportion of people living within 5 km of the contact line (90%), greatly outweighs the Ozarianivka Bakhmutskyi population living beyond 5 km (10%) (Figure raion Kostiantynivskyi 1). Moreover, as illustrated in Map 2, almost raion Dyliivka all of the area's largest cities (more than 5000 9+1873A Dachne residents), are located within the 5km zone. 75+ Urban >5km Krymske Consequentially, residents of more remote and 4% 2%9% Druzhba smaller settlements are likely to be exposed to Rural >5km 1% Toretsk Shcherbynivka Pivnichne various protection risks when visiting important 61-75 Urban 5km 14% 10%87% administrative and service provision centers in Maiorske Rural 5km 3% Petrivka the cities. Shumy 46-60 15% 9% Zalizne Pivdenne Overall, Toretsk Municipality is highly Figure 2. Population pyramid (>5km) Leonidivka urbanised (96% of the population concentrated 4+9+7+5+2+3 1+5+6+5+4+3 Nelipivka in the cities, Figure 1) due to the historic 31-456% 75+8% 7% 2% economic orientation towards mining rather Yasynuvatskyi 18% 61-75 9% raion than agriculture, with the coal industry leading 16-30 7% 7% Novhorodske 14% 46-60 12% Sukha Balka Reported population in assessed its economy. settlements (persons) 75+8% 31-45 9% n l 4% 2% ba ra With regard to reported age groups, the highest Valentynivka Yurivka ur ru proportion of residents are aged between 61 0-154% 16-308% 8% 7% less than 1000 1000 - 5000 and 75 years (Figure 2 and 3), followed by pre- 61-755% 0-1514% 10% 6% more than 5000 pensioners (46-60 years), both of which can be Female Male 0 24 considered to be among the most vulnerable Km groups owing to low pensions, lack of job 46-60 15% 9% Figure 3. Population pyramid (5km) opportunities and age-related common health Table 2. Estimated population of the largest Inaccessible settlements due to restrictions on 2+11+6+5+4+3 1+7+5+4+3+4 issues. These findings indicate that there is a 31-45 8% 7% assessed settlements movement 4% 75+ 2% trend towards working-age populations leaving Toretsk 32,873 61-75 14% - Zalizne this once economically productive region to 22% 16-30 46-607% 7% 8% - Pivdenne seek better jobs. 11% Novhorodske 10,373 9% 31-45 7% - Shumy 0-15 16-308%