Re-engaging young people who are not in education, employment or training Lessons from the evaluation of the Youth Contract for 16-17 year olds in England Becci Newton, IES Principal Research Fellow

Causes and implications of being NEET at a young age Social disadvantage and vulnerability make NEET more likely But young people attribute NEET to problematic authority structures and sense of failure Social disadvantages and vulnerabilities more likely as a result of being NEET NEET is a persistent status Being NEET scars – there are lifetime social and economic costs There are significant costs to the public purse stemming from NEET In England, local authorities have responsibility for young people NEET between 16-18 years, and up to 24 years for those with Learning Difficulties/Disabilities

What were the trends when the Youth Contract was introduced? 82,300 39,900 25,900

What comprised the Youth Contract? DWP: 18-24 year old claimants - early access to NCS & additional IAG, SBWA, work experience, wage subsidies (£2,200) BIS: 16-24 year olds – Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (£1,500) DfE: low skilled &/ disadvantaged 16-17 year olds NEET – intensive support to re-engage and participate

Youth Contract 16-17 year olds Black box delivery via two models: National via prime provides and supply chains using PbR weighted on sustained participation meeting RPA duties; tight eligibility Local solutions devised by City Deal areas with less restrictive eligibility; some use of PbR National YC available to young people NEET aged 16-17 years who Had no GCSE A*-C (expected qualifications from upper secondary stufy); then extended to: Up to 2 GCSEs A*-C &/ Care leavers and young offenders Regions typically extended eligibility by allowing those with a higher number of qualifications to be supported: Two City Deals focused on providing support to young people NEET, although had differing emphases on work or training as outcomes One City Deal sought to support young people NEET into Apprenticeships specifically

The evaluation approaches

Results Participants had long histories of under-performance and challenges in education Youth Contract assisted many to initially re-engage through bite-size/small step, non-accredited provision; for many this was a pre-cursor to formal learning Overall, 1.8 ppt reduction on national NEET rate (YC targeted only a sub-set of NEET) 12 ppt increase in participation nationally 33% in learning/training nationally (RPA-compliant) Net benefit of £12,900 arising from each sustained re-engagement under national model

Lessons for policy Lack of reliable qualifications data to assess eligibility Identifying eligible young people challenging, relied on LA engagement Inside the Black Box consistent picture of delivery centred on Key Worker support Payment-by-Results to providers did not recognise the work that went into achieving & sustaining participation

Lessons for delivery Key Worker model can support young people in different situations Risk of NEET: mentoring; support to choose, apply and attend post-16 provision NEET after post-16 EET: building trust and confidence, mapping opportunities Entrenched NEET: small-step progression; intensive, holistic support; treated as an adult; trust and rapport Post-16 provision in England appears sufficient/adequate

Lessons for evaluation Innovative use of administrative data; effective estimates of impact using QED led to development of Longitudinal Educational Outcomes data-set in England Re-engagement in education led to estimates of qualifications that would be gained which in turn led to impact estimates Qualitative evaluation approaches provided explanatory material to impacts identified Flexibility and adaptiveness in evaluation approach worked well in respect of Black Box delivery and differing models (national vs regional)