The Scrutiny Review Panel - Youth Unemployment met to establish the scope and priorities for its review into young people not in education, employment, or training (NEET) in Stockport. The panel agreed to focus its scrutiny on the role of employers, the experiences of young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and to gather evidence directly from young people, employers, and education providers.

Review of NEET in Stockport

The panel formally adopted the Scrutiny Review Procedure Rules for its work. The main focus of the meeting was to begin the review of young people not in education, employment, or training (NEET) in Stockport. Councillor Dena Ryness, Chair of the review panel, highlighted the national scale of the issue, referencing the interim Milburn Review which identified nearly one million young people aged 16 to 24 across the UK as NEET. She stressed the need to look beyond headline statistics to understand the lived experiences of young people and the systemic barriers they face.

Richard Mortimer, Head of Economy, Work and Skills, and James Hampson, Work and Skills Impact Lead, presented key findings from the evidence pack. They emphasised the reliability of local data for 16 to 17-year-olds due to statutory participation requirements, contrasting this with the more fragmented data available for those aged 18 to 24. They also highlighted the importance of distinguishing between NEET, not known, and claimant count measures, and stressed the need to focus on sustained outcomes rather than short-term participation.

Key themes emerging from the discussion included:

• The role of employers: There was a strong consensus on the need to investigate how employers engage with young people, the barriers they face in offering opportunities, and how Stockport can better support employers to provide work experience, apprenticeships, and accessible first jobs. The Dutch model, where employers are more integrated into the education and career pathways of young people, was cited as a potential area for learning. The council's existing mechanisms, such as social value clauses in procurement and employment and skills agreements, were also discussed as potential levers.
• Barriers for specific cohorts: The panel identified the particular challenges faced by young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and neurodiverse young people in the workforce. The discussion highlighted that these groups are significantly underrepresented in employment and that recruitment practices and workplace arrangements may not always enable them to demonstrate their abilities.
• Socio-economic background and neighbourhood data: While acknowledging the potential for a link between socio-economic background, neighbourhood, and NEET outcomes, the panel recognised that detailed local data at a Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) level might be challenging to obtain. However, the importance of understanding these disparities was underscored.
• The importance of young people's voices: A crucial element of the review will be to hear directly from young people with a range of experiences. The panel acknowledged that a formal meeting setting might be intimidating for some, and alternative methods of engagement, such as recorded contributions or interviews through trusted intermediaries, would be explored.
• Systemic issues and transitions: The review will examine the cliff edge at age 18 when support systems can change, and the fragmentation of provision across different agencies. The need for a whole-system approach, early intervention, and sustained outcomes was repeatedly emphasised.
• The Milburn Review: The panel agreed to remain flexible and incorporate relevant findings and best practices from the forthcoming second phase of the Milburn Review.

The panel agreed to structure its future work around two main evidence sessions: one focusing on employers and education providers, and another on hearing directly from young people. The dates for future meetings will be determined offline.

Dates for Future Meetings

The panel agreed that the Chief Governance Officer, in consultation with the Chair, would determine the dates for future meetings to ensure the availability of panel members and external witnesses.