School Nutrition Reform: Why Replacing Cafeteria Equipment Is Not Just About Food
The fourth episode of Season II of “Budget Talks” is dedicated to school nutrition reform.
What has really changed now that old pots and Soviet-era stoves have been replaced with new ones? Why have so many stakeholders—from the Ministry of Education to the First Lady and international partners—become involved in school cafeteria renovations? How is the EU Anti-Corruption Initiative saving millions of hryvnias in public funds by reviewing local budget estimates for kitchen upgrades?
In this new episode of the “Budget Talks” podcast, we address these and other pressing questions about the reform. Viktor Maziarchuk, Head of the Center for Fiscal Policy Studies, Orest Stepanyuk, Head of the School Nutrition Reform Team, and Taras Sluchyk, Project Manager at the EU Anti-Corruption Initiative, discuss the importance, urgency, and cost of transforming school cafeterias.
VICTOR
Welcome to Budget Talks, where we discuss money that truly matters. This podcast is supported by the International Renaissance Foundation. Today we’re adding a bit of flavor to our Budget Talks, because we’ll be talking about the reform of school nutrition. Over the past two years, 2.5 billion UAH has been allocated for this reform. Why are we talking about this now? Because it’s not just about what’s on the menu or the food itself—it’s about changing an entire philosophy, ensuring transparency in procurement, and building a proper system with the help of our international partners. This reform brings together a variety of stakeholders: government bodies, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education, the Cabinet of Ministers, the President’s Office, our international partners, and civil society. That’s why I’m happy to welcome our guests today: Taras Sluchyk from the EU Anti-Corruption Initiative, and Orest Stepanyak, who leads the team behind the school nutrition reform in Ukraine. Welcome, colleagues. Let’s start with this question: why do we even need to reform school nutrition? What triggered these fundamental changes?
How a Personal Story Sparked Systemic Change
OREST
That’s a simple yet very deep question. The short answer is: to support children, to support Ukrainian families, and most importantly, to raise a healthy generation. I won’t go into clichés—I’ll just share my personal story. Until I turned 30 (I’m almost 40 now), I weighed about 100 kilograms. I had been overweight since childhood. I kept asking myself, why? Why did this happen? Well, the answer goes back to how I was raised. My wonderful grandmother, who’s now 94, always made sure I was well-fed. That made sense for her generation—they lived through terrible times, through war, famine, and servitude. They knew what it meant to go hungry, so for them, having sacks of potatoes and sugar in storage meant safety. For her, making sure a child was always full was just common sense. But all those calories took their toll. I was always overweight. Getting myself down to 70 kg took years of effort. And I don’t want today’s children to have to go through what I did—learning about high blood pressure and cholesterol at 30, and suddenly being forced to change your entire lifestyle. The goal of this reform is to build a healthy nation through healthy eating and a proper food culture. And eating habits are formed in childhood, at school. That’s why school nutrition reform is so important.
VICTOR
What inspired you to take this on? There must have been some trigger that got you researching, reaching out to the Anti-Corruption Initiative, and kicking off this whole process. I’ve worked on monitoring public projects for years, and in my opinion, this one stands out as the best in terms of how it’s structured. It’s built around a clear philosophy—three key components. And Taras, your team’s Anti-Corruption Initiative fills the government’s gaps perfectly. So, what was your inspiration?
OREST
Let me break it down clearly. For me, the initial inspiration was First Lady Olena Zelenska—she was the one who started this reform. Every major process needs a driving force, someone to initiate it. I joined the team after the train had already left the station, so to speak. Why did I hop on? Because I’ve spent my whole career in gastronomy and the food business. That’s where my expertise lies. So when I saw the chance to get involved, I thought—why not? What is school nutrition reform, really? At its core, it’s about the kids. But the ones implementing it are the communities.
There’s the First Lady as the initiator. There’s our reform team of 10 people supporting the rollout. There are numerous international partners. The government develops the regulations, sets the framework, and helps finance it.
But the execution lies with local communities because schools in Ukraine are communal institutions. We have over 1,000 communities and almost 10,000 schools working in in-person or hybrid formats. These communities are the school founders. So, the reform has a clear structure and implementation mechanism. We’ve got a National Strategy for School Nutrition Reform—a major document. Then there’s an operational government plan, with clearly assigned responsibilities for each objective and ministry.
And there are four main strategic goals:
Community Capacity – helping communities have both the funds and the know-how to implement the reform. This includes institutional capacity—knowing how to do it—not just money. Our international partners, especially the Anti-Corruption Initiative, are crucial here.
Infrastructure – even if we have food and money for it, we need proper kitchens and canteens. That means dining areas, furniture, serving lines, and up-to-date kitchen equipment that meets health standards.
Personnel Capacity – even with food and kitchens, if there are no cooks, we’re stuck. Most school cooks are working from 5 a.m. to late evening, often without any additional training. Technologies and approaches evolve, so we had to support them.
Promotion of Healthy Eating – the goal is for Ukrainians to consciously choose healthy food. That means reaching families through their kids and through schools.
So, these are the four strategic goals we and the government are working on. And when you look at all four, you’ll see money everywhere: money for food, for infrastructure modernization, for training vocational school staff, etc. And to be honest, this terrifies me. Recently, I was talking to an investigative journalist about our cooperation with the Anti-Corruption Initiative. He said, “1.5 billion for infrastructure? That’s peanuts.”
And I said, “Maybe it’s peanuts at the national level. But for us, it’s huge—it’s a massive responsibility.” So for us, it was crucial to build a safety cushion, an airbag that prevents abuse. Where there’s big money, there are always people looking to slice off a piece. Our job was to find ways to prevent that.
“The NABU, prosecutors… and meat patties?” — Why Anti-Corruption Experts Took an Interest in School Nutrition
VICTOR
So just to clarify: around a year ago, you reached out to the Anti-Corruption Initiative, and that’s where things started? Can you walk us through how that happened? Why did you choose them?
OREST
I still remember that first call with Taras. I called him up and said, “School nutrition reform.” And he goes, “Wait, what? We work with NABU, with prosecutors—serious stuff. And now we’re talking about… patties?” It was a bit funny, honestly. Even I found it a little odd. But I couldn’t shake this fear—this looming anxiety about the huge sums of money that would soon flow into this reform and how to ensure proper oversight. We realized that by reforming school meals, we could also reform broader systems and approaches. So we started looking for partners. I don’t even remember how exactly we got introduced to the anti-corruption community, but someone recommended the EU Anti-Corruption Initiative. I called Taras—and that’s when things took off.
VICTOR
Taras, how did you come on board?
TARAS
To be honest, before you called me, I thought school nutrition reform was mostly about dishes, meals, chefs like Klopotenko, and the First Lady’s initiatives. I remember hearing about the first central kitchen being launched—it was all very positive and nicely promoted on Facebook and Instagram. But I hadn’t connected it to this massive infrastructure component—the modernization of school kitchens. Then I learned that the Ministry of Education was planning to invest in these kitchens across communities. And we already had experience working with local communities, as well as with infrastructure projects in other government agencies—like the State Agency for Restoration and the Ministry for Recovery. One key factor in any public project, especially one involving innovation or reform, is political will. You need that driving force. And in this case, we had it. The First Lady was not just involved—she was putting her reputation on the line for this reform. That signals real political commitment. There will always be people asking: has the reform really delivered results? And that’s okay. It keeps things on track. Governments have a million priorities, but when someone is laser-focused on a specific change, that change becomes possible.
What makes this reform especially valuable is that it has long-term impact. When a school kitchen is renovated, it changes not just the physical space, but children’s eating habits. Eventually, that influences broader food culture—how future adults think about health, aesthetics, and nutrition. These kids will grow up to be voters, business owners, civil servants—people who’ll carry those standards into the world. And when, years from now, they’re voting for a mayor, they’ll care about whether their own kids are getting nutritious meals in a well-equipped school kitchen. Even now, every investment into a kitchen is really an investment into new standards, a new culture. You might not see the full effects today, but they’ll come. And this isn’t some vague, soft project—it’s tangible, it’s concrete. You can actually see what changed. It’s infrastructure. It’s real objects. And that’s rare in the world of international technical assistance, which often feels very abstract. The Ministry of Education was also incredibly open to collaboration. They wanted support, they asked for it, and they were clear about the kind of help they needed. That was key. All of those factors aligned. After talking with our director, Allan Christensen, we realized this might not fall directly under our traditional mandate—but it was something we could contribute to meaningfully. So we decided to go ahead. And another important point: this reform is a comprehensive effort. What we’re working on is just one piece of the puzzle. There’s still a lot of work around menus, chef training, and so on. We’re just part of a bigger movement—and that matters to us. It’s not just about building or renovating something. It’s about changing how the system works. And thankfully, we’ve got other international partners involved too, offering their expertise in different areas.
The Expertise That Helped Save ₴133 Million
VICTOR
I want to pause and highlight something. I know how things work behind the scenes—I’ve seen how your team operates. Could you share with our listeners what exactly your team does? We now know how this partnership started, but what kind of support do you provide, at what stage, and what have you already accomplished?
TARAS
Let’s start from the top. The Ministry of Education has funds from the state budget to help communities renovate their school kitchens. Communities can submit their project proposals to the Ministry to apply for that funding—sometimes with co-financing, sometimes without. These projects can come from big cities or tiny villages. When these proposals arrive at the Ministry, they’re basically construction documents: descriptions of what needs to be renovated, what materials to use, and a detailed cost estimate. Now, the Ministry has to make decisions—through a special commission—on which projects to support. And that’s tough. Because the Ministry’s main expertise is in education policy, not construction or budgeting. But these are infrastructure projects. And at the design stage, there’s a real risk—whether intentional or not—that communities or their hired contractors could include inflated prices or make technical mistakes.
VICTOR
Or simply not know what the best approach is.
TARAS
Exactly. And that’s where we come in. We’ve built a team that thoroughly analyzes the technical and financial parts of each proposal. We review the cost estimates and then give the commission a list of potential risks or flaws. For example, in some 2025 project proposals submitted by communities, we found things like Belarusian equipment listed in the budget—equipment that’s under sanctions. Other proposals included outdated engineering solutions or hugely inflated prices. In some cases, the scope of work included non-kitchen repairs—which might have been needed, but they weren’t eligible for state funding under this program. So our team helps the Ministry take a deeper look at the project documents, to ensure they meet standards and don’t contain any red flags. Once the government makes its final decisions—based on proposals submitted through the DREAM system—then the communities that were selected receive the funds, and the procurement process begins.
VICTOR
Let me interrupt for a second—just to underscore this: Your experts review every single project proposal and budget—and these are pretty substantial documents. We’re talking about over 200, right?
TARAS
Yes.
VICTOR
Around 300 last year, I believe. And can you share the numbers? How much public money was saved thanks to your team’s recommendations?
TARAS
We reviewed every proposal and suggested changes. Some communities accepted our recommendations and made corrections. As a result, the Ministry ended up saving ₴133 million, which was then reallocated to additional kitchen renovations. So instead of spending that money inefficiently, the government and communities used it to fund more school projects. It wasn’t just “saving” for the sake of saving—it was about getting more done with the same money.
VICTOR
So instead of renovating 150 school kitchens, they were able to renovate 170. Basically, your expert analysis allowed the state to expand its impact.
OREST
Exactly. And more importantly—it ensured that the money didn’t get misused.
VICTOR
Absolutely.
OREST
For me, that preventive work is key. We often hear big corruption scandals and wonder—why did this happen? Well, in our case, we had a system. The government handed over its authority in a transparent way. The DREAM platform made all the documents public. The Anti-Corruption Initiative brought in independent experts who reviewed the documents alongside the Ministry of Education. They flagged overpriced items, unnecessary purchases, or even equipment from sanctioned countries. In the end, we didn’t just save ₴130 million—we also ensured every community still got what they needed. And some even got more. This kind of analysis isn’t just about pricing. It’s also about quality. For instance, buying Belarusian equipment during wartime? That’s completely unacceptable. And often, it’s not even about corruption—it’s about inefficiency. Like replacing an old Soviet electric stove with… a new electric stove. That’s not innovation. Modern kitchens can use combi ovens, which can steam 200 cutlets in 15 minutes—without oil, which is healthier and faster, and saves a ton of electricity. So the right decision doesn’t just save money—it improves nutrition, working conditions, and energy efficiency. And our experts don’t just check numbers. They analyze kitchen layouts, making sure clean dishes don’t cross paths with dirty ones, that the equipment fits food safety standards, that everything works properly. This is a comprehensive process. And that’s what makes the money go further—and work better.
How Expert Teams Helped Communities Avoid Shady Procurement
VICTOR
Great. So we’ve covered the first stage of your involvement—thanks to you, over ₴130 million was used more effectively. What came next?
TARAS
The second stage begins once the communities receive the funding. They then have to procure contractors to actually carry out the renovations. At this point, we had a separate team of procurement experts monitoring the entire process. When a tender was announced, we checked:
– Were there any discriminatory conditions?
– Was the tender likely to be appealed to the Antimonopoly Committee?
If so, it could delay or even stop the procurement, pushing deadlines and jeopardizing the entire project. That means the kitchen might not be ready in time, and students wouldn’t get the benefits. We also monitored the level of competition, because the more competition, the better the quality. One sign that things went fairly well at this stage is that there weren’t that many investigative reports in the media. There were some—but considering how many projects there were, it’s a good sign.
VICTOR
Were there any major scandals? Like, any local government or school department that really botched the process—high prices, violations, refusal to cooperate?
OREST
One of our key roles is coordination, and to me, every community is valuable. I won’t name names or throw anyone under the bus. Yes, there were investigations, publications, and yes—some officials improved their practices afterward. Others didn’t. That’s a normal part of the process. As Taras said earlier, the Ministry of Education can’t monitor every community. So what options are there? Let’s think ahead. Next year, the Ministry will again offer subventions. And if a community proves to be a bad partner—takes the money, runs a bad procurement, ignores audit findings, or ends up being investigated—then they simply won’t get funding next time. We’re talking about 150 projects out of 12,000 schools. There’s a long road ahead. So communities are basically proving themselves—either as reliable or unreliable partners.
VICTOR
So sure, someone might try to cash in short-term, but they have other needs—shelters, more kitchen funds next year, and so on.
OREST
Exactly. This whole initiative is like a pilot project for the country, and it’s shown just how effective public transparency can be. By making the process open and visible, we’ve proven that transparency attracts new partners. Yes, integrity and anti-corruption sound like noble ideals. But there’s also a very practical side to all this. For the reform team, transparency helps us secure more donor funding. Our international partners—especially in the West—need to see that we’re fully open and accountable. We’re not hiding anything. We have nothing to be ashamed of. This helps us renovate more schools, modernize vocational education—and it strengthens trust.
VICTOR
I imagine that for your international partners, the EU Anti-Corruption Initiative is also a signal that you’re serious and trustworthy.
OREST
Absolutely. We’re deeply grateful for their support.
TARAS
And look, this wasn’t an easy decision for the Ministry. Traditionally in Ukraine, subventions work like this: A commission meets, makes decisions, distributes funds, and local governments carry out the work. That’s it. But here, the Ministry of Education and the reform team decided to try a completely different approach. And it’s not easy to implement. To my knowledge, this is the first time in Ukraine that subvention funds have been handled this way. Yes, it adds some complexity in the short term. But in the long run, it dramatically improves the quality of the infrastructure projects. It also builds confidence among international investors. They can see that it’s not just talk—there are concrete decisions being made by real officials, based on real analysis. That matters. Because every high-ranking official will say they support transparency—but no one will admit publicly that they want to misuse the funds. What’s great about the Ministry of Education is that they took a clear stance. They said: “We’re listening to expert recommendations. We’re helping communities revise their project documents. If there’s a problem with procurement, we’re getting involved.” And once procurement ended and construction began—honestly, that was an even tougher phase. Because there’s always a gap between what’s on paper and what’s actually happening on the ground. And sadly, that’s not just a Ukraine problem. This is a global issue in construction: project plans often don’t match reality. So we thought long and hard about how to address this. We didn’t want a situation where everything looks perfect on paper—but in reality, the site is a mess. The most realistic and cost-effective solution we found was remote technical oversight. Basically, during the construction process, communities were asked to send in photos at specific stages, following a certain methodology. That way, our engineers and technical experts could review and spot any glaring mistakes. Now, this obviously doesn’t replace on-site monitoring—you can’t catch every hidden detail. But it does help catch major problems, like: “Whoa, this clearly shouldn’t be done this way.” And here’s the good news—many communities actively sent in photos and implemented our suggestions.
VICTOR
And what about the ones that didn’t?
TARAS
Some were simply not used to being asked for this kind of thing. I don’t think anyone had ever required this kind of oversight before. Others knew their projects were flawed from the start, so they were reluctant to share. Some tried to cut costs by using cheaper materials or making questionable design choices. Maybe their contractor was a friend, but not the most competent builder. Still, a large number of communities did follow through.
OREST
Some started out doing it right away. Others waited until we really pushed them. But in the end—they all complied.
Remote Monitoring, Data Quality, and the Public Dashboard
VICTOR
Taras, what else did your team do? Could you explain what criteria were used to evaluate the procurements and the construction oversight? That would really help illustrate the scale of this effort.
TARAS
For the procurement process, we used about 40 different indicators. And for the technical supervision—over 80 indicators. To really show how the process unfolds—and where each project stands—I want to thank you personally for helping us launch the interactive map. It publicly displays the entire progress of this subvention. It’s designed to be convenient: You can go in, see which projects are at what stage, get the basic aggregated information all in one place. You can check the status of procurements, the status of remote supervision—it’s all visible. And honestly, even ministries don’t always have access to such clear, aggregated data. They might know individual projects well, but when they need an overview or a quality-assured dataset—getting that is tough. Even just collecting and compiling accurate information is a challenge. And then presenting it in a user-friendly way? That’s another layer. Sadly, this also exposed a major issue with data quality in state registries and systems. People often don’t realize how much effort the entire government machinery has to put in just to make a school kitchen renovation happen. It may seem like a simple repair job—but it involves a huge amount of coordination. And I’m glad you brought up speed, because that’s another thing worth highlighting. We talk a lot about how long infrastructure projects take. I haven’t seen studies comparing Ukraine to EU countries—but from what I’ve observed, we’re not the slowest. Honestly, I think we might even be among the fastest—at least in some cases. And we’re certainly not the worst in terms of quality. I’m sure of that. If you do a cost-benefit-time analysis, we’re actually doing pretty well.
OREST
And if we’re talking about control mechanisms—I think we’re ahead of the curve. At least for this project, I’d say we’re a regional leader.
“Don’t Chase Pretty Numbers”: Changing the Logic of Public Projects
VICTOR
First of all, thank you for bringing us in as data experts—to help connect all these blocks together. One thing that was crucial for us was to create a tool that updated daily and showed the real-time status of each project. We’re tracking 183 schools—and every day we update procurement data, payment statuses, and more. Then that data gets verified. That was a big challenge. I also appreciate that you raised the issue of data quality. It’s not just me—more and more people are realizing that poor data is a real problem for government decision-making.
If a ministry wants to make smart policy decisions, it needs to have:
– High-quality data
– Reliable partners
– Expert input
– A clear understanding of the current situation
That’s essential. And that’s why I’ve said from the start—I consider this reform the best project implemented in Ukraine that involves government, international partners, and civil society working together. And if we’re talking cost-benefit, this one probably has the highest return. Of course, that’s my personal view—but I believe it strongly.
OREST
Let me add something. There’s one thing we haven’t fully evaluated yet, but we plan to in the coming years: expertise development. Everything we’ve been doing—ideally, the state should already have the capacity to do it on its own. But the truth is, we’re building that capacity. We’re transferring knowledge to the state, to local communities. The officials who’ve gone through reporting processes and remote monitoring—now they know how to do it. I often say that Ukraine has many problems, and yes, one of them is a lack of money. But the biggest problem? A lack of expertise. People often just don’t know how to do things the right way. By creating real, successful examples—like this reform—we’re raising that expertise. In fact, that’s the first strategic goal of the reform: financial capacity and the skills and knowledge of procurement officers.
TARAS
Let me add something that may not be popular with some government officials: I think we need to stop chasing deadlines so obsessively. In Ukraine, there’s always this pressure around subventions:
– “You must spend the money by this date.”
– “You must complete everything within six months.”
– “You only have one month, one week, one day!”
But when you rush, you always sacrifice something. You simply can’t build something high-quality in one month if it really takes three. There’s this internal mentality that unless 100% of funds are spent by a certain date, the project has failed. But that’s not true. We need to set realistic timelines. You can force everyone to work faster—but then quality will suffer. And at the end of the day, we’ll be stuck using this school kitchen for years, maybe even decades. It’s not just about some nice report saying: “We built 100,000 of this,” or “We finished 1 million of that.” On the ground, it may look very different.
VICTOR
Exactly. Don’t chase pretty numbers.
TARAS
Right. Better to finish fewer projects, but do them 100% right, than to rush and claim success on paper for 1,000 unfinished or poorly built projects.
“Corruption Has Three Layers”: Standards, Trust, and Engaging Ethical Business
OREST
After everything we’ve gone through these past two years, I’ve come to a big conclusion: Corruption in infrastructure has three layers:
Design
Procurement
Reporting
And if you only tackle one of those, even the best project can be ruined by the end. That’s something I’ve really internalized. But here’s the good news—we’ve shown we can standardize. Everything we’ve developed during this reform—we’re turning it into clear, usable documents. Call them guides, manuals, whatever you like—but they’re professional standards. For example:
A standard for school cooks: what skills and qualifications they need.
A standard for modern school kitchens: layouts, materials, zoning, and so on.
We’re doing our best to make all of this systemic. And I truly hope we can make anti-corruption measures just as systemic—turn them into universal tools that can be replicated elsewhere. In fact, we’re already seeing demand for that. We’re working on new projects beyond just the Ministry of Education’s subvention—other initiatives under the broader school nutrition reform. There’s one more thing I want to highlight: In integrity-focused projects, it’s crucial to engage honest, ethical businesses. I come from the business world myself. And frankly, I know a lot of amazing entrepreneurs in Ukraine who say: “I will never work with the government—no matter how much they pay.” That mindset needs to change. One of my personal missions is to break that stereotype. The more we bring honest business into public processes—the fewer shady deals we’ll see. When ethical companies participate, they bring transparency, professionalism, and healthy competition.
VICTOR
Absolutely. What we’ve seen through this entire reform is that it’s not just about food. It’s about trust, about partnership, and ultimately, it’s about our future—because it’s about our children. Colleagues, thank you sincerely for this conversation. Thank you for sharing how you’ve implemented this project. I wish you continued success. And I truly hope that the practices and systems you’ve developed here will be expanded to other public and even private sector projects. Because this is what efficiency, transparency, and trust really look like. And trust—that’s the foundation of everything. This has been Budget Talks. Thank you to our colleagues, and most of all, thank you to our defenders—for making it possible for us to live and breathe in a free country. Please subscribe, leave a comment, and share this podcast.
TARAS
Thank you.
OREST
Thank you—likewise.
This episode was translated from Ukrainian and adapted into English with the help of artificial intelligence. The text has been reviewed to preserve the meaning and natural flow of the conversation.