Conclusions and recommendations
Who are "NEETs"?
1 We accept that the term "NEET" is
imperfect. In particular, its use as a noun to refer to a young
person can be pejorative and stigmatising. It is, however, a commonly
used statistical category, and—in the absence of an appropriate
alternative—we have accepted it as a first step in understanding
the issues. (Paragraph 18)
What action has the Government already taken?
2 There have been substantial changes to the provision of information, advice and guidance, not least of which is a greater role for local authorities. The Government must monitor the quality of delivery of information, advice and guidance across England.
(Paragraph 30)
What more needs to be done?
3 Young people make progress at different rates.
Policies and funding mechanisms should not disadvantage those
who work at a different pace from the majority of their peers.
We welcome the work that the Government has already done to introduce
flexibility into its Strategy for young people; we recommend that
greater stress should be placed on the creation of an over-arching
and seamless strategy for 16-24 year olds. (Paragraph 35)
4 We recommend that the Government consider extending the September and January Guarantee to those 18 year olds for whom further education or training is appropriate. However, these Guarantees have to have been delivered successfully for 16 and 17 year olds before any extension to 18 year olds is considered.
(Paragraph 36)
5 We recommend that the Government provide a scheme of work placements for 16 and 17 year olds in projects of benefit to the community, such as those offered through the Community Task Force. Young people taking part in such a scheme should receive any benefits to which they would otherwise be entitled. Such an initiative is essential if the Government is to properly plan for the raising of the participation age to 17 in 2013 and to 18 in 2015.
(Paragraph 40)
6 Young people who are NEET often face a number
of barriers to participation and need to access support from a
variety of sources. The co-location of services such as healthcare,
housing support, access to benefits and financial support and
careers advice and guidance in a joined-up approach could help
young people to access more easily the help they require. Such
provision could prove to be more cost-effective than current structures.
We recommend that the Government take steps to commission a number
of pilots, in order to assess the costs and benefits of the "one-stop-shop"
approach. (Paragraph 44)
7 Not all young people will be in a position to begin a training course in September or January of a given year; some may drop out of education or training during the academic year and wish to begin a new course. We recommend that the Government set aside some of the funding for the September and January Guarantees to support local authorities in offering places in education and training to young people throughout the year.
(Paragraph 47)
8 We were struck by the approach taken in the Netherlands, in which relatively generous levels of benefits and other support are offered to young people in exchange for greater compulsion to take up education, training or work. We recommend that the Government consider the merits of this approach.
(Paragraph 52)
9 We welcome the fact that the Government is
undertaking a cross-departmental review of the financial support
offered to 16-18 year olds. We urge the Government to bring forward
changes to the benefit arrangements for young people living in
supported housing, in order to enable them to access all appropriate
opportunities for training and employment. We also urge the Government
to address the barriers that risk preventing young people on benefits
from improving their skills through unpaid work or full-time volunteering.
We expect the Government to examine closely the provision made
for 16 and 17 year olds in severe hardship, and to ensure that
these young people are not deterred from pursuing opportunities
in education and training by the constraints of the benefits system.
(Paragraph 53)
10 Local authorities play a central role in delivering
initiatives intended to increase rates of participation among
16-18 year olds. We are concerned that existing rewards for good
progress are not sufficient to drive the necessary improvements
in local authorities' performance. We urge the Government to review
the mechanisms by which local authorities are rewarded for significant
increases in the rates of participation of 16-18 year olds. In
particular, we recommend that the Government give consideration
to linking such rewards with savings made by the Department for
Work and Pensions when an increase in participation in education,
employment and training leads to a reduction in the number of
young people claiming benefits. (Paragraph 57)
11 We recognise that future solutions to reduce the proportion of young people not in employment, education or training will have to be more cost-effective and will require efficient, joined-up working at a local level. To this end, we warmly welcome the piloting of the Total Place programme and strongly encourage the Government's stated objective of achieving a "whole area" approach to public services.
(Paragraph 59)
| 
