Contests with public voting in August in Ukraine: dates and organisers
For contests in August in Ukraine, the published reports name two Kyiv participatory budget e-votes that opened in August, and one entry window for a contest that closed in August 2018. Neither round is a prize contest as the reports describe it, and only one of them states both its start and its finish. The reports give no results date for any of them, and the only entry window they give closed on 15 August 2018.
Rechecked on 22 October 2026.
Two Kyiv e-voting rounds opened in August, one with a stated end date
Two public e-voting rounds in Kyiv opened in August in the published reports: the Kyiv City Council's round on next year's Participatory Budget projects, which ran from 17 August to 15 September 2021, and the Kyiv City State Administration's round on Participatory Budget-3 projects, which started on 24 August 2018. Neither round is described as a prize contest, and the reports say nothing about prizes for either.
The 2021 round was announced on 10 August, a week before its window opened on 17 August. From 17 August to 15 September is 29 days, so the round spans the end of August and the first half of September. A reader gets the full timeline from that report: a notice date, a start date and an end date.
The 2018 round has a start date and nothing else in the reports. The reports say the Kyiv City State Administration began electronic voting for Participatory Budget-3 projects on 24 August 2018, but they give no closing date, no count date and no results date. A reader who needs the end of that round should look for the administration's own notice, since the reports do not supply it.
- Kyiv City Council's e-voting ran from 17 August to 15 September 2021.
- The 2021 round was announced on 10 August, a week before it opened.
- Kyiv City State Administration started e-voting on 24 August 2018.
- The reports give no closing date for the 2018 Kyiv round.
- Both rounds were for participatory budget projects, not prizes.
City e-votes on projects carry no prize in the reports
A participatory budget round asks residents to back projects, and the reports describe both Kyiv rounds in exactly those terms: e-voting on projects, with dates attached. Because no prize is named, a reader should not look for draw rules in either round. A reader who finds a prize tied to a budget round should check the organiser's own terms before trusting the offer.
The difference matters for the objections a reader brings. Prize delivery and draw rules belong to prize contests, and the reports describe neither for these rounds. A budget round raises different questions: which projects were on the ballot, and how the count was run, and the reports answer neither.
What the reports leave out is the count itself. Neither round's report gives a tally, a project count or a threshold, so the reports say nothing about how a result was reached. That gap is the one the reports leave open for both rounds.
- City e-votes on projects carry no prize in the reports.
- Prize delivery and draw rules belong to prize contests, not budget rounds.
- The reports give no tally, project count or threshold for either round.
- Neither round's report says how a result was reached.
- Check the organiser's own terms before trusting any prize tied to a round.
The 2018 round authorised voters through Bank ID
The only identity step in the reports is the Bank ID authorisation of voters in the 2018 Participatory Budget-3 round. The reports give no detail of that check beyond the authorisation itself, and they do not say what it covered.
For a reader, that step is a verification the organiser chose, not one the reader can change. A reader asked to authorise through a bank identity should know that the check belongs to the round, and the reports describe no other way to take part in the 2018 round.
The reports do not say whether the 2021 round used the same check, so that question stays open for it. Anyone who needs the verification details for a Kyiv round should ask the city body in writing and keep its answer with the round's dates.
- The 2018 round authorised voters through Bank ID.
- The reports say nothing more about that check.
- The reports do not say whether the 2021 round used the same check.
- Verification is a step the organiser chose, not one a reader can change.
- Ask the city body in writing what check applies to any round.
The one entry window in the reports ran 15 May to 15 August 2018
The All-Ukrainian Advocate of the Year 2018 contest accepted nominee questionnaires from 15 May to 15 August 2018. That is the only entry deadline the reports give that falls in August, and it closes a nominee window rather than a vote. Neither Kyiv round had an entry window in the reports, because both were voting rounds.
The window ran three months from opening to close, and that is the only lead time the reports measure. A nominee who filed on the last day had the whole window to prepare, but the reports say nothing about any nominee's own timing or how many filed early. A reader cannot take a preparation period from one contest and apply it to another.
A reader planning for an August deadline should take the opening and closing dates from that contest's own terms and treat the 2018 example as a single case, not a rule. Where the terms print a date, write it down with the line that states it, because a later reminder from the organiser is not a substitute for the original terms.
- The 2018 Advocate of the Year nominee window ran 15 May to 15 August.
- That nominee window is the only entry deadline in August in the reports.
- Nominee questionnaires were accepted for three months in 2018.
- Neither Kyiv round had an entry window in the reports.
- Use each contest's own terms for its opening and closing dates.
The reports name no scam, legal or disqualification case for either round
The reports show no scam case for either Kyiv round or for the 2018 nominee window. A reader can still check the basics: confirm that the body named in a report runs the round on its own pages, and that the dates on those pages match the dates in the report. A mismatch is a reason to stop and ask the organiser, not a reason to take part.
Legal status is a question for the rule that governs each round, and the reports cite no statute or regulator for these rounds or for the nominee window. No legal test is set out here. A reader who needs a legal answer for a Kyiv round should ask the body that ran it, since that body set the round's dates and method.
The reports name no platform rule and no disqualification clause for either round. Where a submission is removed, the reason sits in the organiser's terms, and a reader who wants to know what leads to removal should read those terms before voting. The reports describe no removal in any round, and keeping a dated copy of the terms makes a later dispute easier to settle.
- The reports show no scam case for the rounds or the nominee window.
- Confirm that the body named in a report runs the round itself.
- The reports cite no statute or regulator for these rounds or the window.
- The reports name no platform rule and no disqualification clause.
- Where a submission is removed, the organiser's terms give the reason.
Rules that apply
Public e-voting in Kyiv is run by the city body that holds each round, and the reports name that body for both rounds: the Kyiv City Council for the 2021 round and the Kyiv City State Administration for the 2018 round. These are participatory budget rounds on projects, so the round's own announced dates and method set its rules, not a prize contest's terms. The one identity step the reports describe is that voters in 2018 were authorised through Bank ID. For the nominee window of the All-Ukrainian Advocate of the Year contest, the reports give dates and nothing on the rules behind them.
What we decline
The page does not name a winner or a result for any Kyiv round, and it cannot set dates that the reports leave open. It makes no claim that any entry will succeed. A contest's own rules decide who counts as a valid entrant, and the reports here say nothing on how a bought vote is treated. The two Kyiv rounds and the 2018 nominee window were checked against their published reports, and the sources were reviewed on 22 October 2026.
Questions and answers
The published reports name two Kyiv rounds that opened in August: the City Council's round from 17 August 2021 and the State Administration's round from 24 August 2018. Both are participatory budget rounds, not prize contests. The reports name no other August opening in Ukraine. The 2021 round's announcement on 10 August came a week before its opening, and the 2018 round's close is not stated at all.
None of the rounds in the reports closes in August. The 2021 round ran to 15 September, and the reports give no closing date for the 2018 round at all. The one August close the reports give is the 15 August 2018 deadline for nominee questionnaires, which is an entry deadline rather than a vote close. Until the administration's own notice is read, the 2018 round's close should be treated as unknown.
The one voting duration the reports give is the 2021 round's: 17 August to 15 September 2021, which is 29 days from first day to last. The 2018 round has a start date and no end date. The 2018 nominee window ran from 15 May to 15 August, which is three months, but that was an entry window rather than a vote. Durations for other contests must come from their own terms.
The reports do not say. Neither Kyiv round carries a results date, and the e-voting in the reports is a vote on projects rather than a prize with a named winner. The nominee window of the 2018 Advocate of the Year contest closed on 15 August, and the reports give no announcement date for nominees or winners. The organiser's own results notice is the place for that date, and it should be checked against the dates in the terms.
The reports give one example of an entry opening: the 2018 Advocate of the Year contest accepted nominee questionnaires from 15 May, three months before its August close. No other entry opening is given. A reader planning for a different contest has to take that contest's opening date from its own terms, because the reports say nothing about how far ahead any other entry must be ready.
The reports give one example to work from: the 2018 nominee questionnaires opened on 15 May and closed on 15 August, so an entrant to that contest had three months from opening to close. The reports give no preparation period for any other contest. Whether a given August contest opens in May, June or later depends on its own terms, and an entrant should start from the opening date printed there, not from this example.