DOZORRO monitoring specialists (TI Ukraine) found overpricing in meat procurement by education departments in Pervomaisk and Yuzhnoukrainsk. Suppliers are probably related companies.

The Department of Education of Pervomaisk City Council concluded an agreement for the supply of various kinds of meat for UAH 5.98 million with Myasnytskyi Dvir LLC. The procurement transaction was conducted as open bidding with a feature, but only one supplier participated in it. The prices in the contract are significantly inflated. Thus, chicken fillet is bought at 219.9 UAH/kg, while in Prozorro the average price is 152 UAH/kg. The retail price is also much lower. For example, in Silpo, chicken fillet is sold at a price of 167 UAH/kg. Chicken carcasses in Pervomaisk are bought at 135 UAH/kg, and the average price on Prozorro is 97 UAH, in supermarkets—starting from 82 UAH/kg. The cost of beef in the contract is almost 280 UAH/kg, pork—231 UAH/kg. The supplier is Myasnytskyi Dvir LLC from Pervomaisk. According to YouControl, its owners are Oleh Tsomin and Oleksand Tsomin.

The Department of Education of the Yuzhnoukrainsk City Council buys meat a little cheaper: chicken fillet at 204.99 UAH/kg, beef at 240 UAH/kg, pork at 210 UAH/kg. However, even such prices are higher than on Prozorro and on the commercial market. The contract for UAH 4.5 million was concluded with Olha-Plus LLC from Pervomaisk, whose owner, according to YouControl, is Olha Tsomina. Similarly, the procurement transaction was conducted as open bidding with a feature, but only this company submitted its bid.

“Despite the fact that the tender documents of both procurement transactions did not contain explicit discriminatory requirements, the procuring entity required 35 different documents and certificates from the participants. This may be the reason why no one else decided to participate in the tenders. The expected costs of both procurement transactions seem inflated,” explains Yaroslav Pylypenko, DOZORRO analyst.   

As of January 2024

Product name Price of Myasnytskyi

Dvir LLC

Price of Olha-

Plus LLC

Price of the State Statistics Service (Ukraine) Price of the State Statistics Service (Mykolaiv Oblast) Price on Prozorro

(Ukraine)

Average retail price
Beef 279.99 240.00 251.64 245.76 210.27 214.75
Pork 231.00 210.00 184.72 195.11 153.78 170.50
Chicken fillet 219.99 204.99 159.82 169.78 152.09 167.25
Chicken thigh 120.00       104.14 118.70
Chicken carcass 135.00   89.92 94.55 97.05 87.85

Monitoring experts of the DOZORRO project estimated that the total overpayment under the contract in Pervomaisk might amount to UAH 1.3 millionin Yuzhnoukrainsk—almost UAH 900,000. They sent requests to procuring entities, asking the latter to adjust their prices to match the market ones. The experts also informed the governing bodies of the procuring entities and law enforcement officers about potential overpayments.

Department of Education of Pervomaisk City Council in Mykolaiv Oblast

Product name Quantity, kg Price, UAH/kg (including VAT) under the Contract Average market price, UAH/kg* Potential overpayment, UAH
Beef 2,960 279.99 218.94 180,699.65
Pork 3,641 231.00 173.35 209,897.58
Chicken fillet 10,444 219.99 162.70 598,365.77
Chicken thigh 12,532 120.00 108.32 146,339.58
Chicken carcass 3,768 135.00 89.42 171,734.02
Total 1,307,036.61

Borys Hrinchenko Department of Education of the Yuzhnoukrainsk City Council 

Product name Quantity, kg Price, UAH/kg (including VAT) under the Contract Average market price, UAH/kg* Potential overpayment, UAH
Chicken fillet 9,000.00 204.99 162.70 233,952.98
Chicken** 7,000.00 180.00 98.10 584,385.82
Pork 3,800.00 210.00 173.35 80,335.93
Total 898,674.72

*Average market prices were calculated as the average between product prices in the Prozorro e-procurement system, the commercial market, and prices according to the State Statistics Service of Ukraine

** Chicken (deboned thigh or boneless shin)

The Education Department of Yuzhnoukrainsk replied that it believed that the price corresponded to the market price and even referred our letter to the supplier. The company replied that the price was formed on the basis of analysis in the region. However, at our request, law enforcement officers opened criminal proceedings. We are still waiting for a response to the appeal regarding Pervomaisk.

Myasnytskyi Dvir LLC and Olha-Plus LLC are potentially related because their owners are probably husband and wife. In addition to the shared last name, Oleg and Olga Tsomin are also registered at the same address. According to YouControl, until 2018, individual entrepreneurs Olha Tsomnina and Oleh Tsomin shared a phone number.

Myasnytskyi Dvir LLC was already involved in criminal proceedings related to violations in procurement of food by the same education departments of Pervomaisk and Yuzhnoukrainsk. According to the investigation materials, the procuring entities and the contractor concluded several additional agreements to the contracts for the supply of meat and dairy products. Thus, they illegally reduced the scope of supply without reducing the total value of the contracts. In addition, the pre-trial investigation established that the delivered products did not meet the requirements stated in the tender documentation, were of inadequate quality, and did not meet the quality of products according to the state standards of Ukraine and the requirements for food.

The material was prepared within the framework of the USAID/UK aid TAPAS Project/Transparency and Accountability in Public Administration and Services.

array(3) { ["quote_image"]=> bool(false) ["quote_text"]=> string(366) "Despite the fact that the tender documents of both procurement transactions did not contain explicit discriminatory requirements, the procuring entity required 35 different documents and certificates from the participants. This may be the reason why no one else decided to participate in the tenders. The expected costs of both procurement transactions seem inflated" ["quote_author"]=> string(35) "Yaroslav Pylypenko, DOZORRO analyst" }

Despite the fact that the tender documents of both procurement transactions did not contain explicit discriminatory requirements, the procuring entity required 35 different documents and certificates from the participants. This may be the reason why no one else decided to participate in the tenders. The expected costs of both procurement transactions seem inflated

Yaroslav Pylypenko, DOZORRO analyst