Resolution Foundation sets five tests for Milburn youth work review

The Resolution Foundation has set out five tests for Alan Milburn's Review into Young People and Work, which is expected to be published next week according to a post by the think tank dated 11 November 2026. Its economists say about one million 18 to 24-year-olds across Britain are not in employment, education or training (NEET).

The authors, Alex Clegg and Nye Cominetti, stress that NEETs are not a single group. Some are looking for work and some are not, some claim benefits and some have health conditions or disabilities, and some will be NEET only briefly while others face longer-term barriers.

The UK NEET rate is 15.6 per cent, against 6.1 per cent in the Netherlands, 8.6 per cent in Ireland and 10.6 per cent in Germany. The Foundation says the gap comes mainly from fewer young people in education, rather than from low employment. Real-terms funding per 16 to 18-year-old further education student fell by 8 per cent between 2010-11 and 2025-26. Restoring it to the 2010-11 level would cost around £1 billion, it estimates.

On apprenticeships, the authors say too little of the Growth and Skills Levy reaches young people, because employers often use it for high-level courses for older, existing staff. They want the Review to recommend ringfencing levy funding for under-25s, worth £1.5 billion. Removing degree apprenticeships from the levy would free a further £240 million.

Employers have called for employer National Insurance to be cut for under-25s. The Foundation says this would cost £5.1 billion on 2026 data, or £132,000 for each additional young person helped into work.

It says the existing Youth Jobs Grants and Jobs Guarantee are more cost effective, at around £36,000 per additional young person employed. Doubling funding for both would cost about £300 million a year and help an extra 40,000 young people into work.

The 260,000 young people receiving Universal Credit Health currently have no requirement to engage with support towards work, education or training. The authors argue for a permanent, personalised "career start" approach rather than "work first" conditionality that pushes people into any available job.

Matching the average OECD spend on work coaches, training and wage subsidies would mean at least £5 billion more, the authors estimate. The total benefits bill for young people is £8.1 billion, which they say limits the scope for savings in the short term. They note that Universal Credit Health and Personal Independence Payment protect 120,000 young people from poverty, and that around one in five young PIP recipients did not face additional costs, a question they leave to the upcoming Timms Review.

The authors conclude that the solutions are neither quick nor cheap, and will require investment while public finances are strained.