Transitions to post‑16 learning: why they matter

Robin Webber-Jones is the Deputy CEO and Executive Director of Curriculum at the Bedford College Group, and Karen Campbell is the Principal of Bedford College.

Effective transitions into post‑16 learning are a cornerstone of social mobility and local economic prosperity. When transitions falter, young people are more likely to become not in education, employment or training (NEET), with scarring effects on health, earnings and future participation. High‑quality, partnership‑led transition systems, grounded in early identification, personalised pathway design, and alignment to local skills improvement plans (LSIPs), are central to reducing NEET and improving retention, attainment, and progression.

The case for strengthening post‑16 transitions

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) says that “young people who experience prolonged periods of inactivity face persistent disadvantages in employment and earnings throughout adulthood”.

England’s NEET rate has risen since 2021: 13.6% (837,000) of 16 to 24‑year‑olds were estimated NEET in between October and December 2024, with particularly higher rates among 18 to 24-year‑olds. Short‑term movements should be interpreted with caution due to Labour Force Survey reweighting, but the upward trend remains clear and concerning for local systems supporting Year 11 leavers each summer.

The Office for National Statistics shows a similar pattern: 13.4% (987,000) NEET between October and December 2024, with official notes warning about volatility and advising use alongside other indicators.

The consequences of NEET are well‑evidenced: time spent NEET is associated with poorer physical and mental health and a higher likelihood of unemployment and low‑quality work later in life. This is why it’s so important we have preventative policy and sustained support during transitions. OECD analysis reinforces that early joblessness has lasting impacts, and that education‑to‑work alignment is critical, particularly where macroeconomic conditions are challenging. The Department for Education emphasises that early identification of risk factors and coordinated intervention are critical to preventing NEET outcomes.

What “good transition” looks like

Effective transitions work as a system rather than a single event, emphasising early identification, inclusive pathways, employer‑aligned progression, and strengthened school/community partnerships. While there should be specific targets for priority groups – NEET, risk‑of‑NEET, electively home educated, special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), social, emotional, mental health difficulties (SEMH), disadvantaged learners – the need for the system to effectively share data and plan intervention is paramount.

Risk of NEET indicators (RONI) support early identification using attendance, exclusions, SEND status, care involvement, youth justice indicators and other factors. Recent DfE guidance outlines principles, data calendars, and processes (including National Client Caseload Information System (NCCIS) tools), and sets expectations for collaboration between local authorities, schools and colleges.

The practice is evolving: Essex County Council reports locally tailored, dynamic RONI tools that integrate multiple data sources to generate risk scores, enabling targeted early support and retrospective validation against NEET outcomes. European VET toolkits document similar RONI frameworks, codifying indicators and mapping support routes for Years 8 to 11. Beyond tools, recent work on geographical inequalities shows that risk factors and their effects vary across local authorities, underlining the need for place‑sensitive transition planning and data‑informed commissioning. In 2012, the National Foundation for Education Research (NFER) argued that ‘strong relationships and personalised support are the most effective levers for reducing NEET risk’.

Personalised pathways and sustained support

At The Bedford College Group, we have developed a transition strategy which starts to identify priority groups and interventions, as well as set an approach to agreeing standards for transitions to post-16 education from those from different backgrounds. While it is not a panacea, it could provide a blueprint for larger more system level changes needed.

The strategy outlines four objectives that align closely with a strong evidence base:

1. Early identification and outreach
2. Flexible, inclusive pathways
3. Employer‑led routes
4. Strengthened partnerships

These strands, underpinned by governance, form a coherent transition system that should improve retention, achievement and progression, while contributing to local NEET reduction.

Indeed, qualitative studies of transitions into further education highlight that transition is processual and emotionally laden; supportive practitioner‑learner relationships, peer connections, and structured visits to FE settings increase engagement and facilitate identification with new learning environments. Systematic reviews and programme evaluations show that personalised mentoring and transition coaching improve confidence, belonging, and retention, particularly for under‑represented groups moving from school or college into higher education. Evidence from alternative provision initiatives demonstrates that transition mentors, multi‑agency governance, employer coordination, and flexible curricula, extended across the summer into Year 12, result in higher sustained EET outcomes than national averages, again pointing to the importance of continuity beyond enrolment day.

Employer alignment and LSIPs: connecting transitions to local demand

The Youth Futures Foundation notes that “multi-agency collaboration and employer engagement significantly improve sustained NEET outcomes”. Indeed, transitions are most effective when pathways are employer‑aligned.

Statutory guidance on local skills improvement plans (LSIPs) places employers at the heart of post‑16 technical education, requiring designated employer representative bodies to articulate local skills priorities, refresh intelligence, and work with providers on actionable plans. Updated LSIP guidance situates these plans within the broader Skills England and Post‑16 Education and Skills White Paper landscape, and clarifies joint working with strategic authorities and providers; a framework that transition strategies can use to ensure curricula and progression routes reflect labour‑market demand.

Partnership working: the engine of effective transitions

Good transitions depend on partnership capacity and staffing:

• schools: careers leaders and pastoral teams
• colleges: transition leads, SEND and wellbeing
• local authorities: participation and tracking
• employers: mentoring and work‑readiness
• voluntary sector providers: coaching and outreach

DfE’s RONI guidance devotes extensive sections to roles, responsibilities, data sharing, and joint transition policies, including regular meetings through Year 11, providing a blueprint for local collaboration. Policy actors continue to press for joined‑up strategies that foreground belonging, sustained relationships, and fair, flexible post‑16 transitions. The University of Bath’s Connected Belonging programme, presented at a 2025 Parliamentary evidence session, identifies these as priorities for NEET reduction, contributing practical toolkits now used across multiple authorities. Historic evidence from DfE pilots (Activity Agreements and Entry to Learning) also found tailored packages which were often multi‑agency, effective in re‑engaging NEET youth, with lessons on incentives, brokerage, and continuity of support.

In a context of rising youth inactivity, good educational transitions are essential public policy infrastructure. They are: preventive, reducing risk before disengagement occurs; developmental, building belonging, agency, and skills; and economic and therefore aligning talent to local demand.

The evidence is clear. Early identification with RONI, personalised, sustained support, and partnership working that brings together schools, colleges, local authorities, employers and the third sector, all tied to LSIPs, are the hallmarks of systems that lower NEET and lift progression.

Implementing these features with fidelity, provides a practical route to achieving measurable reductions in early withdrawals and increasing sustained EET outcomes for vulnerable learners in the years ahead.