A pair of shoes taught me more about NEETs than any policy paper

It is reassuring to see the growing urgency around the NEETs (not in education, employment or training) challenge in this country. More concerning, however, is the apparent lack of joined-up thinking about how it will be addressed.

I have a somewhat unique perspective, having led a national training provider that delivered one of the strongest traineeship programmes in the country. I am now CEO of a small charity that works face-to-face with young NEETs every day.

The traineeship programme, discontinued in May 2023, was designed for 16 to 24-year-olds who were motivated by the prospect of work but not yet work-ready. I delivered the programme for more than a decade, primarily in Yorkshire communities with relatively low educational attainment and high unemployment.

The programme was not perfect, but it allowed providers to deliver a flexible, work-focused offer. Employers could support young people into work with the backing of a pastoral tutor who provided maths and English support, employability training, CV writing, interview preparation and guidance on workplace expectations.

Crucially, tutors could also provide practical support: helping learners understand public transport, plan journeys, manage basic budgeting and navigate the challenges that arise during the first few weeks of employment. They often helped young people overcome homelessness, domestic abuse and safeguarding concerns alongside more practical barriers.

The pair of shoes

One case has always stayed with me. A young man was excelling in a traineeship placement with a national retailer. Then, without warning, he stopped attending. Eventually, we discovered that his only pair of shoes had fallen apart. Unable to afford a replacement, he stopped going out altogether and quickly found himself in a difficult place.

We bought him a new pair of shoes. No bureaucracy. No lengthy assessment. Within days, he was back at work and ultimately secured full-time employment.

That story captures what traineeships did well. They were flexible enough to provide tailored support for young people who were motivated to work but faced barriers that many policymakers never see.

I remember attending discussions with the Education and Skills Funding Agency shortly after the decision was made to end traineeships. It was suggested that traineeships were primarily a route to entry-level qualifications that could be achieved elsewhere and were unlikely to lead directly to employment.

My argument then is the same as it is today: for most NEET young people, qualifications are not the main issue.

The real challenge is support, guidance and pastoral care.

Most of the young people we supported then, and most of those I work with now, do not have someone who can help them complete a job application, review a CV or explain how to write a professional email. Many struggle to navigate public transport networks or understand workplace expectations.

Big initiatives for NEETs

Over the past year, three major initiatives have emerged to tackle the growing NEET crisis.

The first is foundation apprenticeships. They have merit, but they feel too long, are not always pitched at the right level and remain heavily focused on vocational delivery. Many providers also appear to view them as carrying a level of risk that makes engagement difficult.

The second is the youth job grant, a £3,000 incentive for employers to recruit a young person who has claimed Universal Credit for six months or more. The principle is sound, but important questions remain. How will employers find suitable candidates? How will they support them when challenges arise? What happens if a young person leaves after only a few months? With 20,000 grants available, this represents a £60 million investment that must deliver meaningful outcomes.

The third initiative is the job guarantee, offering six-month paid work placements and training for 18 to 24-year-olds who have claimed Universal Credit for 18 months or longer. Again, there is much to like, but questions remain. What happens after six months if the employer cannot retain the individual? What about those with enormous potential who have been unemployed for 12 months and are equally in need of support?

Each initiative has been designed with good intentions. Viewed together, however, they reveal a system that remains too rigid, fragmented and ultimately not inclusive enough to meet the needs of the young people it is trying to support.

What’s missing

NEET young people do not fit neatly into funding bands, eligibility criteria or arbitrary timeframes. Some need intensive pastoral support before they can contemplate employment. Others are ready for work but need help overcoming practical barriers. Some would thrive in a work placement, while others need confidence-building and employability support first.

The question should not be which programme a young person qualifies for.

What is missing is a single, flexible programme that combines the best elements of all three approaches: employer engagement, work experience, targeted training, financial incentives and, crucially, pastoral support. A programme tailored around the individual rather than forcing the individual to adapt to the programme.

We have been here before. The success of traineeships was never simply about qualifications; it was about flexibility. It was about trusting providers and frontline practitioners to identify barriers, intervene quickly and provide the right support at the right time.

If we are serious about reducing NEET numbers, we need to stop creating multiple schemes that address different parts of the problem and start building a single, coherent pathway that supports the whole journey into sustainable employment.