Kherson is entering a new heating season under extremely difficult circumstances. In August 2026, Russian strikes caused critical damage to the Kherson Thermal Power Plant — one of the city’s key heating facilities. Despite this, Kherson is preparing for the heating season and seeking alternative solutions to provide residents with heat, including decentralized heating sources. In this context, the reconstruction of heating substations is particularly important.
In June 2026, Municipal Public Utility “Khersonteploenergo” announced four procurements for the reconstruction of central heating substations in Kherson. The total estimated value of these procurements was UAH 39,071,934.00. Of this amount, UAH 32,586,937.16 was financial support from UNICEF.
International assistance to Ukrainian communities involves not only the rapid restoration of critical infrastructure but also a particular focus on transparency and the efficient use of funds. We therefore analyzed the four procurements, their terms, progress, and results, as well as the available information about the company that received all four contracts.
Four Procurements — One Bidder
Formally, all four procurements were conducted as open tenders. However, in each case, only one company submitted a bid — BLITS BUD INVEST LLC. It was also the winner in all four cases, signing contracts with Municipal Public Utility “Khersonteploenergo” worth UAH 38,950,781. It is appropriate to analyze these procurements not only individually, but also in the context of the overall history and capacity of the winning company.
The procurements were as follows:
- UA-2026-06-08-013562-a with an estimated value of UAH 5,269,988 including VAT; the bid price was UAH 5,260,000 including VAT;
- UA-2026-06-11-007405-a with an estimated value of UAH 7,986,359 including VAT; the bid price was UAH 7,956,000 including VAT;
- UA-2026-06-19-001025-a with an estimated value of UAH 11,084,177 including VAT; the bid price was UAH 11,016,686 including VAT;
- UA-2026-06-16-003163-a with an estimated value of UAH 14,731,400 including VAT; the bid price was UAH 14,718,095 including VAT.
Thus, across the four procurements, the difference between the estimated value and the bid prices amounted to only about UAH 121,000, or approximately 0.31% of the total estimated value.
Such a low level of savings does not in itself prove that prices were inflated or that the procurement procedure was violated. However, this means there was no actual price competition among bidders. Therefore, in this case, the important question is not only why a single company participated in the tenders, but also how well-founded the initial estimated value of the works was.
The chronology is also noteworthy. The four procurements were announced over the course of one month, at intervals of several days. Thus, within 12 calendar days, the contracting authority assembled a portfolio of four large contracts, all of which were ultimately awarded to the same company.
This does not constitute evidence of collusion or a prior agreement. At the same time, such concentration of contracts with a single contractor provides grounds to examine whether the procurement conditions were accessible to other potential bidders and whether the procurement model chosen was appropriate for the specific facilities. On the other hand, this may have resulted from market specifics, martial law, the complexity of the work, the dangers of working in Kherson, and other factors. Notably, the winner did not compete with other companies for the right to receive the contracts, while its prices remained effectively near the upper limit of the budget. Four separate procedures created four separate opportunities for the same bidder to obtain contracts, and in each case, competition effectively did not take place.
The technical documentation for procurement UA-2026-06-11-007405-a also deserves attention. Its qualification criteria refer to the central heating substation at 1-A Vazova Street, although the procurement concerns a different facility. On the one hand, this may simply be a technical error made during documentation preparation; on the other, it may indicate that part of the documentation was mechanically copied from another procurement.
It should also be noted that the technical specifications across the four procurements are very similar, which can be partly explained by the fact that they concern the same type of facilities — central heating substations. At the same time, the documentation contains specific technological and structural characteristics of the equipment, as well as a very narrow set of parameters—a number of specific requirements. For example, all four procurements explicitly require patented operating modes and protocols (Wilo-Dynamic Adapt plus, Wilo Net), as well as branded sealing components (HangOn, SonderLock). The formal “or equivalent” disclaimer does not eliminate the risk of challenges, since the technical descriptions contain unique trade names. Such narrow technical specifications may significantly restrict competition.
What Is Known About the Winner
The company was registered in October 2024 in Irpin, Kyiv region, with authorized capital of UAH 100,000.00, and has already secured contracts worth millions of hryvnias. According to Opendatabot, it participated in 62 tenders, with tender sales totaling approximately UAH 74.6 million in 2025 and UAH 256.3 million in 2026. By comparison, this figure was only UAH 80,000 in 2024. In 2025, the company reported revenue of approximately UAH 39.9 million and a net profit of only UAH 243,800, even as significantly larger amounts were already appearing in procurement contracts. Thus, in less than two years, the company progressed from a newly established enterprise to a notable participant in the public procurement market. This pace of growth does not, in itself, indicate a violation, but it provides grounds for verifying whether the scale of the contracts awarded corresponds to the company’s actual resources.
The clients of BLITS BUD INVEST LLC include the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the Supreme Court, the Executive Committee of the Irpin City Council, joint-stock company “UKRNAFTA,” the Ministry of Social Policy, Family and Unity of Ukraine, the Department for Support of the Operational Rescue Service of the Civil Protection of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine, and other government institutions. Based on the data available to us, the company had not previously carried out similar works in the Kherson region.
It is also noteworthy that, alongside the KVEDs (classifiers of types of economic activities) traditionally associated with construction companies, the enterprise engages in several rather atypical business activities. These include growing cereals, data processing, retail fuel sales, legal activities, and other areas not directly related to repair and construction work. A diverse list of KVEDs does not in itself indicate a violation, so we do not consider it a separate risk factor.
The company has undergone fairly rapid changes in ownership and management. Since September 2025, Vitalii Shmyhlenko has been the founder and ultimate beneficial owner of BLITS BUD INVEST LLC, holding 100% of the authorized capital. Until May 2025, the company’s owner and manager was listed as Zoia Oliinyk (a former head of the Kalytynska village political organization of the All-Ukrainian Union “Batkivshchyna” political party), while its initial owner and manager was Dmytro Blyskun, whose name appears in public registers as an owner or manager of several other construction and related companies across Ukraine, including in the temporarily occupied territories of Luhansk and Donetsk regions. Some of these links are current, while others are historical.
There have also been management changes: the company was initially headed by Oleksandr Serafimovych, while its current director is Oleh Boichenko. He was appointed to the position in October 2025. He also owns MEGOLIT BUD LLC, registered in March 2026 at the same address as BLITS BUD INVEST LLC.
The company’s history of previous contracts also contains several episodes that merit attention. BLITS BUD INVEST LLC was mentioned in a report by the Hrechka news outlet concerning the possible overpricing of certain construction materials. In December 2025, the Special Purpose Emergency Rescue Unit of the State Emergency Service in the Kirovohrad region awarded BLITS BUD INVEST LLC additional repair works worth UAH 6.05 million without a competitive procedure. The direct contract was based on discrepancies identified during the performance of the original contract between the design documentation and actual needs, after which the project was amended and underwent expert review again. According to journalists’ estimates, the difference between the estimated and comparable market prices for eight items may have amounted to approximately UAH 616,000.
Another example concerns a contract worth approximately UAH 2.81 million, concluded following procurement UA-2025-09-25-007110-a by the Department of Education and Science of the Irpin City Council. The deadline for fulfilling the contractual obligations was extended to September 1, 2026, due to additional works which, according to the parties, could not have been foreseen when the contract was concluded. Under the original contract, the works were to be completed by December 30, 2025.
In procurement UA-2025-08-13-001326-a conducted by the Central Geophysical Observatory, BLITS BUD INVEST LLC won with a bid of UAH 1.627 million. The State Audit Service of Ukraine, in particular, noted that when calculating the contract price, the company used an average monthly working-time norm of 171.75 person-hours instead of 173.16, which should have been applied on the date the tender bid was submitted. Following its monitoring, SASU identified a violation of the cost-estimation standards.
According to YouControl, as of September 2026, the company appears in several court documents, including administrative and commercial cases. Among the latest is case No. 911/2544/26, brought by the Municipal Enterprise for the Maintenance and Operation of Special-Purpose Housing Stock “Spetszhytlofond.” In support of its claims, the plaintiff refers to the defendant’s improper performance of its obligations under a loan agreement. BLITS BUD INVEST LLC is also mentioned in materials of criminal proceedings concerning crimes against the foundations of Ukraine’s national security (under Article 111-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), including case No. 760/17145/25.
In addition, the debtors’ register records proceedings involving the Central Interregional Department of the State Service of Ukraine on Labor.
Bidder Documents: Identical Discrepancies in Two Procurements
Another feature of the procedures concerns the bidder’s documents. During our analysis of the procurements, we noted that in two procurements — UA-2026-06-11-007405-a and UA-2026-06-08-013562-a — MCP “Khersonteploenergo” issued the same request to remedy discrepancies before concluding the contract. In other words, BLITS BUD INVEST LLC, as a bidder, submitted documents containing discrepancies twice, after which the contracting authority allowed it to remedy them in each procedure.
What is particularly interesting is that the comments in both cases were identical. The contracting authority did not merely ask the company to clarify some minor detail, but effectively to supplement/correct an entire set of supporting documents:
- bring the names of the vehicles into line with their registration certificates;
- provide vehicle registration certificates/technical passports;
- add the trial balance for Account 10;
- confirm employment relationships with three employees and provide their letters of consent;
- provide confirmation of completion of special occupational safety training;
- correct/update the bank statement concerning financial capacity.
In other words, the issue concerned three key areas of qualification at once: material and technical resources, personnel, and financial capacity.
The bid documents submitted by BLITS BUD INVEST LLC for all four procurements state that the company has the required employees, a comparable contract, and sufficient financial capacity. The company also submitted documents concerning its material and technical resources, lease/service agreements, employees, and equipment. However, Opendatabot shows only 10 employees for 2025. This raises the question of whether the company has sufficient in-house production and staffing capacity to simultaneously carry out four reconstruction projects totaling UAH 38.95 million. This is particularly important given that all four contracts have a similar completion deadline — October 31, 2026. At the same time, BLITS BUD INVEST LLC informed MCP “Khersonteploenergo” that it would not engage a subcontractor/co-contractor.
After analyzing the tender documentation, we found that an absolutely identical package of documents was submitted in all four cases, including the list of employees. In such circumstances, there is effectively a need to carry out four construction projects in parallel using the same employees, machinery, and equipment, which, incidentally, BLITS BUD INVEST LLC uses not as the owner but under lease agreements. We drew particular attention to a lease agreement concluded with SERVICE-BUD Ukraine LLC on May 10, 2025. According to the YouControl analytical system, the company has been in liquidation since August 21, 2024, following recognition of the legal entity as bankrupt. The court decisions register contains 41 documents mentioning SERVICE-BUD Ukraine LLC.
CONCLUSIONS
BLITS BUD INVEST LLC is a young construction company that has significantly expanded its participation in public procurement over a short period. The enterprise was registered only in October 2024, yet in 2025–2026 it became a participant in dozens of procurements, and, according to Opendatabot, the volume of its tender sales reached hundreds of millions of hryvnias.
At the same time, according to its 2025 financial statements, the company has only 10 employees, while its revenue for that period amounted to approximately UAH 39.9 million. This is not evidence of insufficient capacity, but it raises the need to examine how the company can fulfill such a substantial portfolio of construction contracts.
Areas of risk that warrant further monitoring include frequent changes in ownership and management during the company’s first year of operation, a broad range of NACE codes, a significant increase in procurement volumes, the practice of amending contracts, and the potentially significant role of subcontractors.
At the same time, the available public data do not provide sufficient grounds to assert that the company systematically violates the law or engages in dishonest practices. The existing factors are better viewed as a set of indicators warranting enhanced monitoring.
This material was prepared with the financial support of the European Union and Equal Rights & Independent Media (ERIM). Its contents are the sole responsibility of Kherson Regional Charitable Foundation "Union" and do not necessarily reflect the views of the EU and ERIM.
