Independent replacement of windows after shelling is becoming a reason for refusal of state compensation. This conclusion is contained in the study “Analysis of housing reconstruction challenges”(ua)↗️, prepared by the Fedir Shpyh Charitable Foundation jointly with the research company Smart Data Service. The research was conducted from October 2025 to January 2026.
According to the report, windows are the first and most widespread element of housing restoration, both in the private sector and in multi-apartment buildings. They are primarily replaced in cases of minor and moderate damage, during urgent “patching up” of homes immediately after shelling.
At the same time, this very step — rapid independent restoration — often works against owners. In many documented cases, windows were installed before people submitted applications to state or donor programmes, or even before compensation schemes were fully launched. As a result, during inspections by local commissions the damage was either not recorded at all or not included in official reports, which automatically deprived applicants of the right to compensation.
The study shows that under the eVidnovlennia programme, which covers private houses and apartments, windows remain one of the most frequent items of compensation. However, even with a positive decision, owners face limitations: compensation amounts often cover only 30–60% of the actual replacement cost, and the list of approved contractors and suppliers significantly narrows the choice.
During the restoration of multi-apartment buildings, another problem arises. Participation in the VidnovyDIM programme is decided centrally through homeowners’ associations (HOAs), rather than by individual residents. This creates the risk of so-called cross-financing, when some residents have already replaced windows at their own expense or through eVidnovlennia, while the HOA applies for the same elements through VidnovyDIM. As a result, projects may stall at the verification stage or lose funding.
The financial aspect also remains painful. The study records numerous cases where the allocated funds are sufficient only for a basic specification, forcing HOAs or private owners to make additional payments. A separate issue is highlighted for the private sector: windows in non-residential premises — summer kitchens, utility buildings, garages — are not eligible for compensation, although for rural residents they are part of essential living infrastructure.
Operational difficulties further compound the problem: a shortage of installers due to mobilisation and workforce migration, logistical challenges in frontline regions, and delays caused by blackouts and unstable communications. All this makes the window replacement process lengthy and uneven.
The report also pays special attention to customer behaviour. Private owners often focus on price and speed, without understanding the differences between types of insulating glass units and levels of energy efficiency. HOAs, by contrast, expect suppliers to provide a full set of documentation, experience with grant programmes, and the capacity to work with large volumes.
The overall conclusion of the study for the industry is that selling windows for reconstruction is about comprehensive solutions that include documentation, installation and compliance with programme requirements. Companies that adapt to this logic gain a competitive advantage, while independent and informal restoration increasingly results in financial losses for end consumers.