The report finds that renovation finance is genuinely scarce, but the funding gap is not the only constraint: 

• The analysis identifies around €190 million in available or committed lending from international financial institutions and approximately €87 million in grant-based and donor-channelled support. These figures provide an indicative picture and should not be combined into a single total. For broader programmes, they cover only funding clearly identified for public-building renovation and therefore represent minimum estimates. 

• Funding is fragmented and access remains limited. Only the Ukraine Public Buildings Energy Efficiency Programme (UPBEE) provides municipalities with an open, competitive route to apply for financing for public-building renovation projects. Ukraine’s Decarbonisation Fund and the energy service company (ESCO) market are operational but still play a marginal role in comprehensive public-building renovation. 

• At current support volumes, the more immediate constraint is limited project-preparation and delivery capacity. The first completed UPBEE facility was reported only in April 2026, while five municipalities withdrew from earlier selection rounds. 

• The available datasets are incomplete but indicate limited municipal readiness. As of 1 January 2026, only 69 municipalities, around 5%, had an approved Municipal Energy Plan, now required to access state energy-efficiency support. In 2025, fewer than one in five municipalities reported energy-management activity.  

• Some slow implementation reflects wartime reprioritisation, as emergency repairs often take precedence over deep renovation. Nevertheless, the constraints related to data, project preparation, energy management and borrowing capacity are structural and will remain relevant beyond the immediate wartime context.  

The report recommends establishing a programme-independent delivery layer. This should include a common minimum building-data package, funded project preparation, permanent municipal energy-management functions, stronger regional support, financing-risk mitigation, differentiated access according to municipal readiness and the aggregation of similar buildings into larger investment portfolios. 

As a useful reference for Ukraine, the report points to Poland’s energy-advisory network, run by the National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management (NFOŚiGW), and to a competence centre being established by NFOŚiGW with support from the European Investment Bank under the European Local Energy Assistance (ELENA) facility. 

Ukraine should not create another isolated support instrument unless it addresses these systemic bottlenecks. Scaling renovation will require both more accessible, de-risked finance and the capacity to turn it into well-prepared and completed projects.