Local authorities with highest NEET rates have fewest job opportunities

Local authorities with the highest rate of young people not in education, employment or training (Neets) have just six online job ads for every 100 unemployed universal credit claimants, according to analysis of latest data from the New Economics Foundation. 

Even in the places with the lowest rate of NEETs, in May this year there were only 16 online job ads per 100 people on universal credit who are not in work.

Ahead of the publication of the Milburn review next week, which will recommend the government invests in greater employment support, the analysis highlights the additional challenges in local job markets which are preventing young people from entering employment. 

In Blackpool, the local authority with the highest NEET rate, there were five online job ads in May for every 100 universal credit claimants not in work. In Cambridge, the local authority with the lowest rate, this number rose to 61. Cambridge has 12 times as many job adverts per claimant than Blackpool.

George Bangham, head of social policy, New Economics Foundation said:

“We’ve had lots of hints about what the Milburn review will recommend, but so far there’s not been enough discussion about the tough reality of many local job markets. 

“Even the best employment support in the world can’t help young people into work if the opportunities aren’t there. Cutting their benefits pushes people further into poverty, but won’t create any jobs.

“In this context, it wouldn’t be right for the government to pursue cuts to benefits for young people; employment support can be funded by other means. Instead the government should focus on job creation, engaging people with high-quality training and support, and enabling young people to access the jobs that do exist – including by cutting the cost of transport.”

Young people can travel outside of their local authorities for work, but previous NEF research has shown that the high cost of public transport often acts as barrier to doing so.

NEF researchers welcome many of the recommendations that are expected to come from the Milburn review. But are warning the government should be cautious about cutting benefits for young people to pay for investment in employment support, especially in light of the low levels of opportunity available in many local authorities. 

Contact

James Rush — james.rush@neweconomics.org 

Notes

The New Economics Foundation is a charitable think tank. We are independent of political parties and committed to being transparent about how we are funded.

Previous NEF research on young people’s access to work available here: https://neweconomics.org/2026/05/a‑pathway-to-work

The analysis covers local authorities in England and Wales. London is treated as a single area, because the Office for National Statistics (ONS) publishes online job advert data for London as a whole, not for individual boroughs.

Local authorities were ranked by their youth NEET rate: the share of 16 – 24 year olds not in education, employment or training. They were then split into five equal groups. ​“Local authorities with the highest rate of NEETs” refers to the fifth of local authorities with the highest rates. ​“Places with the lowest rate of NEETs” refers to the fifth with the lowest. Figures for each group are calculated from the group’s combined total of job adverts and claimants.

Local NEET rates are taken from the 2021 Census (ONS). Job advert figures are the number of new online job adverts posted in each local authority in May 2026. They come from the ONS’s labour demand volumes data. Adverts are counted where the job is located, and cover jobs at all levels, not only those open to young people. Not every vacancy is advertised online, so the figures indicate relative job opportunities rather than the total number of vacancies.

Universal credit figures are the number of claimants of all ages in each local authority in May 2026, from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Stat-Xplore. ​“Universal credit claimants not in work” covers claimants in the searching for work, no work requirements, planning for work and preparing for work conditionality groups. It excludes claimants who are in work. It includes people who are not currently required to look for work, for example because of ill health or caring responsibilities.