Ukraine has counted school devices. Its next budget needs to measure learning continuity

Spending exposed uneven baselines

The Ukrainian audit covered 2021–2024, when state, local and donor spending on school digitalisation reached UAH 11.3 billion. Some 11,700 municipal schools received 395,260 devices, including 245,700 supplied by international partners. Donor deliveries were generally better targeted towards areas near hostilities and were monitored against identified needs. Parts of the publicly funded programme performed worse. Equipment sometimes arrived up to two years late, while incomplete measures led to the return of UAH 342 million to the budget.

Those totals conceal large differences between schools. The Accounting Chamber’s survey found that 46.6 per cent of schools still used computers manufactured between 2005 and 2011. Another 39.6 per cent reported device shortages. Although 92 per cent had an internet connection, one in ten was limited to 30 Mbps or less and 6 per cent of teachers lacked workplace broadband. These findings cannot establish present conditions because the audited period ended in 2024. They do show why a national delivery total is an unreliable baseline for the 2027 budget.

Continuity is a service, not a stock count

Equipment totals do not show whether a pupil can complete a lesson during an air raid, a blackout or a rapid switch to remote classes. That distinction became visible on the first day of the new school year. Hours after Russian ballistic missile strikes on Kyiv, an air-raid alert sent children and teachers into shelters. Nationwide, 1,306 schools were scheduled to operate remotely and 2,211 in a blended format, leaving almost one-third unable to operate fully in person. Russia is responsible for creating these conditions. Ukraine’s policy responsibility is to measure whether its digital tools reduce the educational disruption they cause.

The useful indicators are operational. Schools should report whether connections and learning platforms remain available during alerts and power cuts, how quickly classes resume in another format and how long faulty devices wait for repair. Regional reporting should show whether pupils and teachers can log in when displacement or an attack forces a sudden move online. Without such data, procurement records cannot distinguish equipment that supports a real lesson from equipment that is outdated, broken or unsuitable for local conditions.

“Equipment totals do not show whether a pupil can complete a lesson during an air raid, a blackout or a rapid switch to remote classes.”

Platforms need the same test. The All-Ukrainian Online School hosted more than 5,000 learning materials for grades 5–11, but lacked full primary-school courses. Donor assistance created 75 per cent of its content, including all content in the mobile app. Auditors found no monitoring of demand for each course, while aggregate monitoring did not show annual growth in the use of learning materials. AIKOM provided basic data services but remained incomplete, so schools continued using paper records and private systems. Eurydice lists universal high-speed internet and interactive content among Ukraine’s priorities as it develops a digital education strategy to 2030. Progress reports should therefore cover actual platform use, missing content and interoperability, not only new functions announced.

Budget decisions can provide the first public test

The Ministry of Education has begun responding. At a parliamentary committee meeting on 17 June, officials said they accepted all 13 recommendations addressed to the ministry even though they disputed parts of the audit. Four measures were complete, six were under way and three linked to budget planning were due by October. The ministry reported monthly monitoring of Online School content, revised digital-skills training and an EDEBO-AIKOM interoperability protocol. These are concrete administrative steps, but the hearing did not provide results showing that pupils experienced more reliable access. The committee chair suggested returning to the issue in October after the remaining deadlines, if members considered it necessary.

Whether the committee meets again or not, the next budget decision offers a clear threshold. Before approving more digitalisation spending, officials should require two public products: a current school-level needs baseline that distinguishes usable equipment from delivered equipment, and results from actual disruptions or exercises showing that pupils and teachers reconnected and completed lessons. The ministry should also explain how recorded failures changed procurement or support decisions. On the evidence now available, Ukraine has not yet shown that school digitalisation provides reliable wartime learning continuity. That judgment would change when published results demonstrate continuity across different regions and document corrective action where service failed.