September is the traditional peak of budget expenditures. It is during this month that officials, schools, hospitals, and utilities are actively developing the budget. We analyzed 177 procurements announced in September in the Kherson region through the Prozorro system. And here is what we saw.
🔹 Activity has increased, but not all of them are effective
Out of 177 procedures, 118 were held for over UAH 122 million. Another 59 tenders, worth over UAH 14 million, failed. The reasons are familiar: lack of competition, errors in documents, and poor preparation of participants. This directly affects the pace of recovery in the region.
🔹 Education is the main area of expenditure
The most money in September was allocated to education, amounting to over UAH 70 million. This includes repairs of schools, boiler rooms, and the purchase of equipment. Among the cases is the current repair of boiler rooms in schools No. 27, No. 39, and No. 50 of Kherson. The work was carried out by local contractors with a good reputation, but all tenders were held without competition. This reduces control over price and quality.
🔹 Infrastructure restoration: brakes at the start
We identified 21 purchases that directly affect reconstruction, including repairs of roads, roofs, boiler rooms, and projects for new facilities, as well as purchases for "Points of Invincibility". But 9 of them did not take place - namely, those related to critical infrastructure.
Roads remain problematic: three tenders for road maintenance were not held. Among the contractors that still received contracts is Global Build Engineering LLC, a company with a history of high-profile defense orders and journalistic investigations. It won two contracts for road maintenance in the Beryslav district without a competitive bidding process.
🔹 Humanitarian procurement: stable, but with questions
The Kherson city military administration has ordered humanitarian logistics from the same contractor - LLC "LDK". Each contract is for 1.068 million UAH. The details of the contracts are similar to a penny; only the numbers in the number of services differ. This may indicate that the volumes are "adjusted" to the planned amount.
Despite this, communities often do not receive the necessary services, including storage and packaging of humanitarian aid, warehouse work, and logistics. But the level of transparency of such procurement raises questions.
🔹 Social sphere: there are positive examples
One of the most important tenders in September is the procurement of psychotherapist services for the "Program for Abusers". This is part of the state policy to combat domestic violence. The procurement was competitive, and the winners have a high professional reputation. This is a good example of how budget funds can really help people.
🔹 Even small purchases do not always go smoothly
The tender for black tea for "Points of Indestructibility" failed twice, and only on the third attempt was it possible to conclude a contract. The reason is the formal errors of the participants. In the end, the individual entrepreneur from Odesa with an honest reputation and the lowest offer won.
🔹 Stray animals - also part of security
It is worth mentioning separately the procurement of materials for animal enclosures. In frontline communities, this is not just a "social" topic: large packs of stray dogs can be dangerous for people. Therefore, creating places for keeping animals is also a contribution to public safety.
September showed: reconstruction is moving, but slowly. Many tenders do not take place, are held without competition, or with dubious contractors. Money is spent, but the effectiveness is questionable.
When the community does not see changes, trust falls. And recovery requires not only resources, but also transparency, control, and accountability.
We have prepared a practical guide for residents that allows you to effectively monitor procurement in your community. The steps are simple to follow, yet effective, as they directly contribute to increasing transparency and the quality of the process.
Detailed data, cases, and a full analytical report - at the link.
This material has been produced with the support of the European Endowment for Democracy (EED). Its contents do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of EED. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in this publication lies entirely with the author(s).
