In brief

  • The money borrowed for schools can be spent for one more year. The deadline by which Romania can draw the sums from the 100 million euro loan taken out for schools moves from 30 June 2027 to 30 June 2028. The amount borrowed stays the same; only the date by which payments can be made changes.
  • Out of the 55 schools envisaged at the outset, the Ministry of Finance writes that 10 can still be built. Another 12 schools, also from the first batch of 22, get only the technical design documentation, that is the project on paper, not the building. About the other 33 schools the published text says nothing.
  • The reason given is that works have become more expensive. The Ministry lists the sharp rise in prices for construction materials, electricity, gas and labour, the shortage of skilled workers, new design requirements such as dining halls and educational psychology rooms, and delays in obtaining approvals and permits.
Act: Government Decision no. 725/2026 approving the amendment agreed through an exchange of letters to the Loan Agreement (Safer, Inclusive and Sustainable Schools in Romania Project)
Published: Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 803 of 22 September 2026
In force from: 22 September 2026, the date of publication, because Government decisions take effect on publication unless they themselves set a later date

The decision published on 22 September 2026 has a single article and, read on its own, looks like a formality: the Government approves a change agreed through an exchange of letters with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the lending arm of the World Bank Group, the same institution behind the 544 million euro loan ratified earlier in 2026. The news, however, sits in the two letters printed immediately after it, on pages 4 and 5 of the edition. There you can see what has become, after five years, of the project for renovating and building schools financed with 100 million euro.

The first letter is from the Ministry of Finance, dated 18 July 2025, and it holds the figures. By that date, contracts worth 48.20 million euro had been signed and contracts estimated at 29.67 million euro were being signed. Added together, they give 77.87 million, which the letter rounds to approximately 78% of the loan, and that checks out. Of the committed amount, 23.57 million euro had already been spent, that is 24% of the loan, another figure that holds on rounding. Against the committed amount, the same 23.57 million means 30%.

The Ministry’s letter also gives the scale of the project. It initially included 55 schools, of which 22 were selected in the first batch. Within the remaining budget, the Ministry writes that four things are still feasible: building 10 new schools, comprising 11 buildings, with equipment and furniture; preparing the technical design documentation for the other 12 schools in the first batch; installing 18 modular schools for pupils to use while the works are under way, with local authorities having found relocation solutions of their own for a further 4 schools; and training activities for teachers and for pupils.

The second letter is the Bank’s reply, signed by the Country Director for the European Union and dated 18 June 2026, that is exactly 11 months after Romania’s request. The reply has four substantive lines and a single object, written into its very title: extension of the disbursement deadline. The Bank sets 30 June 2028 as the later date, on the basis of Section III.B.2 of Schedule 2 to the Loan Agreement. From the signing of the agreement, on 6 May 2021, to the publication of this amendment, 5 years and 4 months went by.

What it changes in practice

The first effect is the date. The disbursement deadline is the day up to which payments can be made from the loan. Whatever is not drawn by then can no longer be used, and works already begun have to be finished from another source. Moving it from 30 June 2027 to 30 June 2028 means exactly 12 months more. Counted from the publication of the decision, the project had 9 months and 8 days of disbursement under the old deadline and has 21 months and 8 days under the new one.

The second effect is that the amount does not change. The sum borrowed remains 100 million euro, and the amendment brings no new money and does not increase Romania’s financial obligations. That is also the condition laid down by the ratifying law: Article 7(1) of Law no. 299/2021 authorises the Ministry of Finance to agree with the Bank changes that do not increase the financial obligations, and paragraph (2) of the same article provides that changes so agreed are approved by Government decision. That is why the present act is a decision and not a new law.

The third effect concerns the schools, and it is to be read in the list in the first letter, not in the single article. For the 10 schools going into construction, the loan covers the building, the equipment and the furniture. For the 12 schools left over from the first batch, the loan covers only the technical design documentation. The difference matters a great deal to a town hall: a finished technical design can be submitted to another funding programme, but it is no substitute for a building, and the published text indicates no source and no deadline for actually building them.

The fourth effect is the temporary relocation of pupils. The 18 modular schools cover the period of the works, and for another 4 schools the letter says that local authorities have identified alternative relocation solutions. The two figures add up to 22, which is exactly the number of schools in the first batch, even though actual construction covers 10 of them.

The fifth effect concerns the date of entry into force. The decision sets no later date, so it takes effect on publication, 22 September 2026, under Article 12 of Law no. 24/2000 on legislative drafting rules, which reserves the 3-day period for laws and ordinances and lets other normative acts enter into force on publication. Eleven days passed between the adoption of the decision, on 11 September 2026, and its publication.

What has changed compared with the previous situation

Until 22 September 2026, the framework was the one set by the Loan Agreement signed on 6 May 2021 and ratified by Law no. 299/2021, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 1189 of 15 December 2021: 100 million euro and a disbursement deadline of 30 June 2027. The only change the decision brings, taken strictly after the Bank confirmed it, is the new deadline, 30 June 2028.

The other change, the one visible in the figures, concerns the ambition of the project. The 55 schools in the initial scope meant, on a simple division of the loan, around 1.82 million euro per school. The 2025 list of feasible activities speaks of 10 new schools, that is 18% of the initial number, while the committed amount already stood at 77.87 million. Even though the committed amount also covers the design documents, the modular schools and the training, not just the 10 buildings, the distance between the two orders of magnitude shows that the starting average was never going to hold.

The letter of 18 July 2025 lists explicitly what changed the costs between 2021 and 2025: the requirement to include in the design of the new schools additional facilities such as dining halls and educational psychology rooms with calming spaces; the installation of energy-efficient heating and ventilation systems meeting the nearly zero-energy building standard; the sharp rise in prices for construction materials, electricity, gas and labour; the shortage of skilled construction staff; inflationary pressures; and delays in obtaining approvals and permits, which stretched out the preparatory stages.

One requested change, however, does not appear to have been confirmed. In the same letter, the Ministry asked the Bank, alongside the extension, for a restructuring of the project together with an update of the results framework, that is of the indicators by which success is measured. The Bank’s published reply touches neither request and stops at the date. From the published text it is therefore impossible to find out what targets the project has after 18 June 2026, or whether the list of activities was formally reduced.

Advantages and disadvantages

What it improves

  • It prevents the undrawn money from being lost. Without the extension, after 30 June 2027 the amounts left in the loan could no longer have been used, and works under way would have had to be finished from the state budget or from local budgets.
  • It costs no additional principal. The State owes the same amount, 100 million euro, and the extension does not increase the State’s financial obligations, a condition expressly laid down by Article 7(1) of Law no. 299/2021.
  • The list of activities is concrete and numbered, not a statement of intent: 10 new schools with 11 buildings, design documentation for 12, 18 modular schools, training for teachers and pupils. It can be checked piece by piece.
  • Pupils in the schools under works have somewhere to learn. Modular buildings are provided for 18 schools, and for the other 4 the letter shows that solutions were found locally, so no one is left without an option.
  • The procedure chosen publishes everything. Approval by Government decision brought the text of both letters into the Official Gazette of Romania (Monitorul Oficial), figures included, which a simple notification between the ministry and the bank would not have done.

What remains a problem

  • Of the 55 schools envisaged at the outset, 10 new buildings remain. This is the single most important piece of information in the whole act, and it appears only in a letter reproduced as an annex, missing entirely from the operative part of the decision.
  • The 33 schools that did not make the first batch are not mentioned at all. The text does not say whether they are still in the project, whether they have been dropped or whether a second batch is coming, so their town halls have nothing to go on.
  • The 12 schools that get only technical design documentation are left with no deadline and no source for construction. A technical design has a limited practical shelf life, and the costs it estimates age for exactly the reasons listed in the letter.
  • The updated indicators are not published. The Ministry asked for them, the Bank does not answer in the letter reproduced, and without them there is no public benchmark against which to measure what is left to do.
  • The extension was obtained late. The request went out on 18 July 2025, by which time 68% of the implementation period counted from signature to the old deadline had already elapsed, even though the letter describes the project as being roughly halfway through.
  • The list of schools is not public. The act speaks of 55, 22, 10 and 12 schools, with no annex giving names and localities, so a parent cannot check which category their child’s school ended up in.

Practical advice

  1. If you are a parent or a local elected official in a locality with a school in the project, ask the Ministry of Education and Research in writing, where the project management unit sits, which of the three categories the school falls into: new build, design documentation only, or outside the first batch. The published act does not contain the list.
  2. Frame the request as a request for public interest information and ask expressly for the classification of each of the 55 schools, not just your own. An answer covering the whole list is harder to give in vague terms than one covering a single school.
  3. Do not confuse the disbursement deadline with the deadline for completing the works. 30 June 2028 is the day up to which payments can be made from the loan. Works finishing later are not prohibited, but the rest of them is paid for from other money.
  4. If the school in your locality gets only the technical design documentation, treat it as a good with an expiry date. Check in good time which funding programme can take the design over and what cost updates it requires, because the prices that upset the original project have not stopped.
  5. For the period of the works, ask early about the relocation solution for pupils. The letter shows that 18 schools get modular buildings and that 4 have solutions found by the local authorities, so whoever falls into the second category has to organise transport, timetable and classrooms on their own.
  6. If you are following the money, the reference point is the loan agreement number, 9236-RO, which appears in the Bank’s letter. It leads to the public documents of the project, including the periodic implementation reports, which are more detailed than the text published in the Official Gazette of Romania.

Frequently asked questions

From when does the decision apply?
From 22 September 2026, the date of publication in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 803. Government decisions enter into force on the date of publication unless they themselves set a later date, and this one does not.
Is more money being borrowed?
No. The amount is the same, 100 million euro. Only the day by which Romania can still draw sums from it changes, moving by 12 months, from 30 June 2027 to 30 June 2028.
How many schools are still being built?
The Ministry of Finance letter of 18 July 2025 shows that, within the budget available at the time, building 10 new schools, comprising 11 buildings, with equipment and furniture, was feasible. Another 12 schools from the first batch get only the technical design documentation.
What happens to the other schools in the project?
The project started with 55 schools, of which 22 were selected in the first batch. About the 33 that did not make this batch the published text says nothing: neither that they have been dropped, nor that a second batch is coming.
Why did the works become more expensive?
The Ministry lists new design requirements such as dining halls and educational psychology rooms, energy-efficient heating and ventilation systems, the sharp rise in prices for materials, electricity, gas and labour, the shortage of skilled workers, inflationary pressures and delays in obtaining approvals and permits.
What does the disbursement deadline mean?
It is the date by which money can be taken out of the loan and paid. After it, the undrawn amounts are no longer available and the remaining expenditure falls to the national or local budget.
Did the Government also approve the restructuring of the project?
That does not follow from the published text. In its letter of 18 July 2025, the Ministry of Finance asked both for the extension and for the restructuring of the project and the updating of the indicators, but the Bank’s reply letter of 18 June 2026 confirms only the new disbursement deadline.
How long did it take to obtain the extension?
The request was sent on 18 July 2025 and the Bank’s reply is dated 18 June 2026, so exactly 11 months later. The Government decision was adopted on 11 September 2026 and published on 22 September 2026.

Errors and inconsistencies in the published text

  • The single article. The decision approves the amendment agreed through the exchange of letters without saying what its content is, and the two published letters show agreement on a single point. The Ministry of Finance letter of 18 July 2025 asks for three things: the 12-month extension, the restructuring of the project and the updating of the indicators. The Bank’s letter of 18 June 2026 has as its object, written into its very title, only the extension of the disbursement deadline, and sets 30 June 2028 without mentioning the restructuring or the indicators. A reader in good faith can reach two different conclusions about what the Government approved: only the new date, or also the shift of the activity list from the 22 schools of the first batch to 10 buildings and 12 sets of design documents. The difference is not theoretical, because it is exactly what decides what 12 localities receive.

Editorial analysis

The act itself is soundly built. The legal basis invoked exists and says what it is credited with saying: Article 7(2) of Law no. 299/2021 does provide that amendments agreed with the Bank are approved by Government decision, and extending a deadline does not increase financial obligations, so it falls within the authorisation given by paragraph (1). The figures in the letter add up as well: 48.20 plus 29.67 make 77.87 million, that is the approximately 78% of the loan, and 23.57 million is indeed 24% of 100. The problem is not the arithmetic but what it shows once taken one step further than the letter takes it.

The first step is the rate of spending. On 18 July 2025, when the Ministry wrote to the Bank, 50 months had passed since the agreement was signed and 23.57 million euro had been spent, that is around 0.47 million a month. Until the new deadline, 30 June 2028, 76.43 million remain to be spent over 35 months, that is 2.16 million a month. The 12-month extension therefore does not solve the gap, it merely makes it more bearable: the rate required for the rest of the loan remains almost five times higher than the one achieved so far. Nothing in the published text explains where that acceleration would come from, and the list of feasible activities suggests the opposite, since the most expensive part, construction, has been cut back.

The second step concerns administrative time, and here the result is hard to overlook. The request for an extension went out on 18 July 2025. The Bank’s reply came on 18 June 2026, after 11 months. The Government decision was adopted on 11 September 2026, 85 days after the reply, and published 11 days later. Between the request for an extension and its entry into force, 431 days passed, that is 14 months and 4 days. The extension obtained is 12 months. The procedure by which a year was won took, end to end, two months longer than the year it won. Since the old deadline remained in force throughout, the planning of tenders and contracts was done, until September 2026, on a horizon that both parties knew was about to move.

The third step is a statement in the letter that does not survive checking. On 18 July 2025 the Ministry writes that the project is roughly halfway through its implementation period. Counting from the signature of the agreement, on 6 May 2021, to the disbursement deadline then in force, 30 June 2027, the period ran to 2,246 days, and by 18 July 2025 1,534 of them had elapsed, that is 68%. Even counting from the ratification of 15 December 2021, the moment from which the project could be financed, the proportion elapsed was still 65%, not 50%. The difference changes the stakes: a request for an extension made at two thirds of the period, rather than at the halfway mark, is judged differently, and the 11-month reply consumed by itself another fifth of what was left.

What should be changed

  • The single article should name what was agreed. One sentence, along the lines of extending the disbursement deadline from 30 June 2027 to 30 June 2028, would close the debate about the scope of the approval and would spare every authority applying the act a comparative reading of the two letters.
  • The list of the 55 schools should be published as an annex, with the classification of each. Three columns, name, locality and category, would turn an act read by a few dozen civil servants into one that any town hall and any parent can check, without a request for public information.
  • The updated indicators should be published together with the amendment. The Ministry asked the Bank for them, and without them there is no public performance benchmark for the remaining 21 months, and therefore no way of establishing, in 2028, whether the project met its purpose.
  • The schedule of remaining disbursements should be published. The act’s own figures show that the rate has to rise almost fivefold; a year-by-year schedule, with amounts, would show whether the figure is realistic or whether a second extension request is on the way.
  • Domestic approval of amendments to loan agreements should have a deadline. Ninety-six days passed between the Bank’s reply and the publication of the decision, for an act with a single article and no budgetary stake of its own. A written deadline, say 30 days from receipt of the confirmation, would shorten the interval in which contracting partners work to a deadline they know has been overtaken.
  • The place where each letter was signed should be given accurately. The title of the decision says that both letters were signed in Bucharest, yet the second one, from the Bank, bears only the date of 18 June 2026, with no locality. The correction is a small one, but an international instrument is identified precisely by place and date.

Original text of the legal act

The text below is reproduced in Romanian, the official form of publication.

The full text, as published in the Official Gazette of Romania

Official Gazette of Romania no. 803 of 22 September 2026 16 pages PDF, 111 KB the act starts on page 4

Open the official PDFDownload the PDF

The viewer is not shown on small screens. Use the buttons above to open or download the file.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific situations, consult a licensed attorney or tax advisor.