Transparency International Ukraine CSO presented the results of two rankings — the Transparency Ranking of 100 Largest Ukrainian Cities and the Accountability Ranking of 50 Ukrainian Cities.

The studies found that the level of accountability is four times as low as the level of transparency.

For the first time in the history of the Transparency Ranking, two cities earned the title of “transparent”— Mariupol and Lviv, with 86.6 and 85.2 points out of 100, respectively. The same cities also became the leaders of the Accountability Ranking of 50 Ukrainian Cities, with 32 and 22 points out of 100, respectively.

There is a noticeable gap between the levels of transparency and accountability in the assessment of other cities. The average accountability of 50 evaluated city councils is only 12.5 points out of 100 possible, while the average level of transparency of these cities is 54.4 points out of 100.

Drohobych (78.1 points), Vinnytsia (76.7 points) and Ternopil (75.2 points) also ended up among the leaders of the Transparency Ranking.

The 2020 leader in terms of growth in the Transparency Ranking is Volodymyr-Volynskyi, which added 22 points to its 2019 score. This increase has put the city in top 10 of the Ranking. During the year, the city council improved the results in most spheres by 1 to 3 points, gained 8 points in “Municipal enterprises” (0.9→9.0) and 6 points in “Housing Policy” (0→6). At the same time, the indicators in “Municipal property” and “Access and participation” dropped by a few tenths.

The five most accountable cities of Ukraine in 2020, alongside Mariupol and Lviv, also include Pokrov (22 points), Bila Tserkva (21 points), and Chernivtsi (20 points). While forming the Accountability Ranking of 50 cities, we took into consideration the feedback of civil society representatives and city residents if they left any on the Transparent Cities online platform.

There is a positive correlation* between transparency and accountability: cities with a higher score in the Transparency Ranking are more likely to get a higher score in the Accountability Ranking.

Key Findings

  • Among the 100 cities evaluated, only two are “opaque” (0-19 points)—Izmail (18.3) and Novomoskovsk (14.8).
  • Despite the positive dynamics, the growth rate is declining. In 2018, the overall level of transparency in 100 cities increased by 38.5%, in 2019—by 10.4%, and in 2020—by 4.4%.
  • 57 cities showed an increase. Volodymyr-Volynskyi gained the most points (22; 49.6 → 71.6), followed by Konotop (19.6 → 38.6) and Fastiv (30.2 → 49.0).
  • The average accountability rate is four times lower than the transparency rate of the 50 cities in 2020 (54.4 vs. 12.5).
  • 45 cities were categorized as “unaccountable,” and 5 as “mostly unaccountable.” Here are the five leaders of this year’s Accountability Ranking: Mariupol (32 points), Lviv and Pokrov (22 points), Bila Tserkva (21 points), Chernivtsi (20 points).


Fun facts from the city transparency and accountability assessment

  • 93 cities out of 100 have provided an opportunity for parents to apply for enrollment of a child in kindergarten and/or school online. Most of them also use resources with an open waiting line for distributing children to preschool institutions.
  • Out of 50 city councils participating in the accountability ranking, 11 city registered a profile in DOZORRO, as well as adopted a local act which makes it mandatory for the spending units to respond on the platform, but only two of them (Pokrov, Mariupol) respond to at least 80% of reviews and appeals.
  • The issue of professional ethics is stipulated in the local acts of only 69 city councils out of 100, o cials — 51, even fewer — members of municipal enterprises. Only 24 city councils have an approved procedure to work with corruption reports, only 38—a procedure for regulating the conflict of interest in the executive committee.
  • Only two participants of the Accountability Ranking (Mariupol and Bila Tserkva) have implemented at least one indicator from the “Housing policy” section. Both cities publish information about housing whose o cial status has been removed. Data on the privatization of such housing are also published. Mariupol is the only city that publishes all data on the transfer of o cial housing for use in accordance with the requirements of the accountability methodology.
  • Volodymyr-Volynskyi gained more points in the Transparency Ranking than any other city. The city rose by 27 positions and for the first time reached the top ten in transparency. The results in “Municipal enterprises,” “Social services,” “Financial assistance and grants,” and “Housing policy” have significantly improved.
  • Budget hearings are regulated in the regulatory framework of 30 cities out of 50, but only two (Ternopil and Melitopol) held them in 2020 with prior online announcements or with online streaming provided.
  • Only 9 city councils met the basic conditions for citizens’ access to the meetings of local council: Odesa, Mariupol, Oleksandriia, Brovary, Chernihiv, Drohobych, Kherson, Kamyanets-Podilskyi, Mukachevo. They provided online broadcasts, early announcements, and they have no discriminatoryprovisions in the documents, and no cases of non-admission in 2020.
  • 9 out of 50 cities participating in the accountability ranking provided a way for citizens to participate in the meetings of standing commissions: Pokrov, Odesa, Mariupol, Sloviansk, Kyiv, Lutsk, Lviv, Mukachevo, Chernivtsi.