Why are a growing number of young people who are NEET reporting work-limiting health conditions?

NEET stands for ‘not in employment, education or training'. Young people (aged 16–24 years) are described as NEET if they are not in school, college or university, doing an apprenticeship or vocational course, or in full or part-time work. The term helps to identify young people at risk of social exclusion and long-term unemployment or economic inactivity.

Being out of work or education is strongly associated with poorer outcomes for individuals over their lifetime, including lower earnings and worse health. It also impacts society, leading to weaker economic growth, widening inequalities and increased pressure on public finances.

In this analysis, we explore the increasing number NEET young people and the wider 16–24 age group reporting work-limiting health, considering reasons for this rise and the potential longer-term impacts.

In the 3 months to December 2025, an estimated 957,000 young people were NEET, equivalent to 12.8% of all 16–24-year-olds. 

Official labour market statistics indicate a sharp rise from December 2021, when 719,000 young people (10.3%) were NEET. Disruptions to labour market data collection since the pandemic mean that recent estimates should be treated cautiously, but other data sources also indicate that the number of NEET young people has risen by a similar amount since 2022–23 (around 200,000). 

Historical figures show that despite the recent increase, these numbers are not unprecedented in the UK. As Figure 1 shows, NEET rates fell for around a decade before rising back to pre-financial crisis levels in recent years, tracking broader trends across the working-age population. In 2024, the proportion of young people who are NEET reached its highest point since 2014. 

While the current NEET rate is not exceptional by historical standards, what has changed is the share of NEET young people who report having a health condition that limits their ability to work. This has risen from 26% in 2015 to 44% in 2025 – a 70% increase. 

Reflecting a general trend

This rise mirrors trends among young people generally. Regardless of whether they are in work or education,16–24-year-olds today are much more likely to report having a work-limiting health condition than they were in the past. Older age groups have also seen a rise in self-reported work-limiting ill health over the same period, but to a lesser extent.

Figure 2 illustrates that the overall share of 16–24-year-olds with work-limiting health conditions increased by 78% between 2015 and 2025 (from 9% to 16%). Over the same period, the share of NEET young people reporting work-limiting health conditions rose by 70% (from 26% to 44%). Among young people who are in education or employment, the share reporting work-limiting health conditions rose by 81% (from 7% to 12%).

Rising rates of mental health conditions are the leading cause of work-limiting ill health, along with the neurodevelopmental conditions ADHD and autism. These have been highlighted by both the independent review into young people and work and the independent review into mental health conditions, ADHD and autism as key contributors to worsening health, rising worklessness and higher welfare spending among young people.

Focusing on these conditions, the evidence points to three possible explanations that may all be contributing to the rise in reported work-limiting health conditions among 16–24-year-olds. These include:

1. changes in the prevalence of mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions, with more young people experiencing clinically relevant symptoms
2. improved identification and diagnosis of these conditions, leading to higher reporting of existing need
3. wider social and economic factors that have shaped how young people experience, interpret and report barriers to work or study.

These factors are closely interrelated. For example, rising prevalence and diagnosis rates may increase awareness, which in turn encourages other young people to seek assessment or support. Similarly, changing social norms may have destigmatised certain conditions, making people feel more willing to seek a diagnosis. The following sections set out the evidence for the contribution of each of these factors in turn. 

Changing prevalence 

Labour Force Survey (LFS) data show that in 2025, around 68% of NEET young people, and 55% of all 16–24-year-olds reporting a work-limiting health condition, identified either a mental health condition or autism as their primary condition. 

For both groups, mental health conditions were the biggest reported driver of increased work-limiting ill health between 2015 and 2020 (Figure 4). An additional 139,000 16–24-year-olds reported a work-limiting mental health condition in 2020 compared with 2015, including an additional 45,000 NEET young people. 

Autism was only introduced into the LFS as a separate category in 2020, with around 300,000 16–24-year-olds and 100,000 NEET young people now reporting autism as a primary work-limiting health condition. However, trends in autism reporting should be interpreted cautiously due to its relatively recent inclusion in the data and wider quality issues with the LFS since the COVID-19 pandemic. 

ADHD is not separately recorded, so it's not possible to observe longer term trends for these conditions within the LFS. However, data from personal independence payment (PIP) claims also indicate that neurodevelopmental conditions are increasingly being reported as a primary disabling condition among 16–24-year-olds, with 100,000 additional awards for autism in 2025 compared with 2019, and 36,000 more awards for ADHD. 

Understanding the extent to which higher reporting reflects higher prevalence is challenging, as the likelihood of reporting such conditions has changed over time with better diagnosis and changing social norms. 

Data from the most recent Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (APMS) suggests more 16–24-year-olds are experiencing symptoms of common mental health conditions (such as depression and anxiety) and ADHD. This survey, instead of asking people to report whether they have a health condition, uses clinical diagnostic surveys to screen respondents for symptoms and reports the shares of the population that meet a clinically relevant threshold. 

As Figure 5 shows, the proportion of 16–24-year-olds screening positive for a possible mental health condition rose from 17% in 2014 to 23% in 2023/24, while the share screening positive for ADHD increased from 15% to 25%.

For autism, the APMS only reports prevalence changes for 16–34-year-olds (rather than 16–24-year-olds). In contrast to the recent LFS trends, where autism has become more commonly reported, the APMS shows no substantial changes in the proportion of 16–34-year-olds screening positive for autism between 2014 and 2023/24. This reinforces the need for caution when interpreting trends in the reporting of autism in the LFS. Autism also represents a greater share of work-limiting health conditions because people with autism are much more likely to report the condition as work-limiting than, for instance, people with mental health conditions. 

By undertaking a more like-for-like comparison of autism prevalence for 16–34-year-olds, we see slightly higher estimates from the LFS (3%) in 2024 than the APMS, which estimates prevalence at 1.2% in 2023/24. This may reflect normal variation between different survey samples as well as differences in methodology between the two surveys.¹

The evidence does suggest that an increased prevalence of symptoms associated with mental health conditions and ADHD could be a contributing factor to more 16–24-year-olds reporting work-limiting health conditions. 

With the data available to us, it is not possible to connect increased prevalence of mental health and ADHD symptoms directly to the rise in reported ill health among NEET young people specifically. But given the similarity in the health trends between NEET young people and their wider age cohort, and the well-evidenced relationship between having a mental health condition or ADHD and being NEET, it is plausibly a contributing factor. 

Improved identification and diagnosis

Across age groups, there has been a rapid increase in diagnosis rates for mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions. Studies show nearly a nine-fold annual increase in new autism diagnoses between 1998 and 2018, alongside large increases in ADHD diagnoses among children and young people. The Health Foundation’s own analysis shows that the share of 20–34-year-olds with clinically diagnosed or treated mental health conditions rose from 6% to 12% between 2009 and 2019.  
 
So, it is likely that some of the increase in reported work-limiting conditions among 16–24-year-olds is being driven by greater awareness and availability of treatment. This is particularly true of autism, for which the underlying prevalence of symptoms has not changed over the past decade.

Importantly, this does not indicate that mental health or neurodevelopmental conditions are ‘over diagnosed’. Despite recent increases in diagnoses, the bulk of evidence shows that common mental health conditions, ADHD and autism are underdiagnosed at a population level, in particular at older ages, compared with clinical diagnostic criteria.  
 
There also isn’t strong evidence that rising diagnosis rates are being driven by a lowering of diagnostic thresholds. Although international classifications for autism, ADHD and depression have evolved over the past 15 years, reflecting advances in clinical understanding and in some cases marginally broadening eligibility, these changes alone are unlikely to account for the rapid growth in recorded diagnoses.

Instead, wider availability of diagnosis and treatment, through both the NHS and private providers, as well as greater demand driven by growing awareness and wider economic and social circumstances, are more likely to be the key factors driving higher diagnosis rates.

Social and economic factors

Wider social and economic factors may also be influencing the share of young people reporting health problems.  

First, greater awareness and more accepting societal attitudes towards mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions may be encouraging more people to recognise symptoms and seek support. This is a positive development that will enable more people to address the real barriers they face to work or study.  

At the same time, system incentives may play an important role in more young people reporting health problems. Practical and financial support through the welfare system, schools and colleges is often made contingent on having health-related barriers to work or study. The number of people using this health-related support has increased substantially in recent years.

The number of 16–24-year-olds in England and Wales receiving PIP rose by 116% between January 2019 and December 2024. Between 2019 and 2024, the number of new education, health and care plans (EHCPs), which identify the support a young person’s needs in school, increased from 54,000 to 98,000. Over half of new plans in 2024 were awarded for either autism or ‘emotional, social and mental health’. 

Early identification of problems and targeted support within the school system are important to prevent young people from becoming NEET later in life. Children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) are at greater risk of lower educational attainment and higher levels of school absence, both of which increase the likelihood of becoming NEET in early adulthood. 

However, increased use of health-related eligibility criteria to target financial and practical support, including in schools, may influence young people or their parents to obtain a medical diagnosis or support from the health system.² For some individuals, this could over time reinforce the perception that the barriers they face to work or study are primarily health related, which may impact both the types of support they seek and their likelihood of going on to report a health condition in labour market data.  
 
Wider demand for financial and practical support has also created pressure on the support accessed via health-related eligibility criteria. Recent evidence shows that policy approaches that tightened conditionality and reduced the generosity of non-health-related benefits led to more people claiming PIP. Similarly, analysis of the SEND system has highlighted how constrained resources and financial incentives have contributed significantly to the rising number of children with EHCPs. This may have had knock-on impacts on the reporting of health conditions and the extent to which individuals perceive their health as a factor that limits their ability to work or study.

To turn the tide on rising levels of young people out of the workforce and growing health challenges, government needs to act on two fronts: stopping young people from slipping out of education or work in the first place, and offering better pathways to help those who are NEET find their way back. This section sets out key areas for government to focus on. 

Improving early intervention support

Recent trends point to a risk of more young people becoming NEET in the near future. Poor mental health and school absence have both risen significantly, with persistent secondary school absences rising from 11% in 2018/19 to 18% in 2024/25. Poor health can lead to a vicious cycle of higher absence, lower attainment and worsening health, eventually leading to young people not being in work or education. The current system is not equipped to meet this challenge.  

Intervening early with emotional and social support for young people and their families can help break the cycle before it leads to a young person disengaging entirely. However, capacity to provide this support is either decreasing or failing to keep pace with demand. 

Cuts have meant that annual spending on youth services was 73% (£1.2bn per year) lower in 2023/24 compared with 2010/11, which may have had a direct impact on declining mental health. Waiting lists for child and adolescent mental health services have also continued to grow, with a 52% increase in the number of young people waiting over a year between referral and treatment in 2023/24 compared with the previous year.

Address funding and accountability issues to reengage young people who are NEET or at risk of becoming NEET

The lack of capacity to provide appropriate and timely support is compounded by accountability issues. For 16–18-year-olds, local authorities have a duty to track and engage young people who fall out of the system. However, in practice, their capability to do so varies, and responsibility for identifying at-risk individuals falls diffusely across schools and colleges, local authorities and wider public services. Provision to support young people in work or education is delivered by a range of organisations, and for those in their 20s who are NEET, there is no cohesive offer. 

Intervening early is especially important because once a young person has fallen out of the system, it becomes much harder for public services to find and reengage them. To help prevent young people falling out of the system, government should restore spending on youth and community services, which can provide early identification and support for those at risk, and continue to expand capacity to deliver mental health support through the NHS. To address accountability issues, government should provide funding to local authorities to guarantee that children and their families can get help from a support worker when NEET risk factors, such as health challenges or persistent school absence, emerge. 

Supporting young people into work or education

Government should focus on creating the right conditions for all young people to participate in the labour market and welfare system. This section outlines the principles of a more supportive approach. 

Create the right conditions for young people to participate in work

While numbers of NEET young people largely track with wider labour market fluctuations, factors such as poor job quality and weak employer incentives to hire and train young people also contribute. Young people, particularly in more deprived regions, are more likely to be in low-paid and insecure work, reducing incentives to work. 

While recent reforms, including phasing out the lower minimum wage for 18–20-year-olds and strengthening rights to flexible working and guaranteed hours, are intended to address this, they may also risk reducing entry-level opportunities if employers scale back hiring in response.

These issues are compounded by the welfare system. Inadequate financial support and overly stringent conditionality can deter young people from engaging with the welfare system altogether, making it harder to identify and support those who are NEET. 

At the same time, financial pressures and unsuitable work-search requirements can push existing claimants towards long-term health-related benefits, from which relatively few successfully return to work. Practical support, where it exists, rarely focuses on helping young people access training, education or work that builds a sustainable career. Instead, it prioritises moving people into whatever jobs happen to be available. 

Provide a financial safety net

The benefits system for people younger than 25 years should be designed around the principle of providing a financial safety net to allow young people to maintain a good living standard while getting help to move into a training, education or work opportunity that sets them up for longer term success. Too often, these opportunities aren’t available or young people don’t have the support they need to access them, and a lack of financial security can undermine their efforts to engage. 

The government is currently considering cutting entitlement to the universal credit health element for those aged 22 years and younger and making participation in work or training mandatory for younger claimants. Cuts to entitlement are likely to directly reduce incomes, pushing more young people into poverty and worsening health, as well as potentially displacing pressure onto other parts of the benefit system. The government should not go ahead with this change. Tightened conditionality also risks causing more young people to disengage from the system entirely, unless appropriate support and routes into work are put in place.

Build better pathways into work

Government should look to further expand the direct funding of work and training opportunities for young people, particularly in areas where NEET rates are highest.³ This could involve subsidising private sector employers to take on and train young people or funding placements in public sector organisations such as the NHS. 

The case for an ambitious approach is strong. Similar schemes, such as Kickstart, were effective at improving youth employment, and the individual and fiscal benefits of building labour market attachment at a young age compound over the course of someone’s life. 

Use existing support models to overcome health barriers

The rising number of young people reporting health conditions brings an additional challenge. For those individuals, placements are at greater risk of breaking down unless additional support is provided. 

Individual placement and support programmes, which are strongly evidenced as supporting employment for those with significant health barriers, can provide a template for how additional support should be provided for those that need it. For others, access to a caseworker to advise them and their employer on how to adapt working practices, and triage to other forms of support, can help sustain employment and reduce episodes of sickness absence. 

The rising likelihood of young people becoming NEET has been described by government as a ‘crisis of opportunity’. The potential costs of inaction are high, and with increasing levels of work-limiting health conditions being reported by young people, the policy response required may differ from that needed in previous decades.

Through its Youth Guarantee and the independent review into young people and work (which has rightly identified health as a key factor), the government has set a clear ambition to ensure more young people remain in education and employment.

Rising levels of reported ill health present additional challenges to this agenda but also create an opportunity to better target support. Higher reporting of work-limiting health conditions may reflect a genuine increase in symptoms for some young people, particularly of poor mental health, while also signalling improved recognition of needs that may previously have gone unmet. 

The task now is to design a response that couples earlier intervention through emotional, health and practical support to prevent young people from falling through the holes in the system with suitable support pathways back into education and work for those already out and who may be hard to reach.