The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

1.1 York Consulting Limited Liability Partnership ( YCL) was commissioned by the Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department ( ETLLD) to undertake qualitative research on Educational Maintenance Allowances ( EMAs) and their impact on young people at risk of being not in education, employment or training ( NEET).

1.2 This final report provides a detailed account of the research.

Aims and Objectives

1.3 The principal aim of the research was to:

"…gather evidence on young people's awareness and experience of EMAs and their impact on young people's choices and pathways. The research will also aim to assess the impact of EMAs on those young people at risk of becoming NEET"²

1.4 The objectives of the research were four-fold:

• to examine young people's awareness and experiences of EMAs
• to assess the impact of EMAs on choices and pathways
• to assess if EMAs help to prevent young people becoming NEET post-16
• to identify other aids/barriers to continuing with education, employment and training post-16

Context

The NEET Policy Agenda

1.5 The NEET group consists of young people who are 'not in education, employment or training'. The Scottish Executive estimates there are 35,000 young people in Scotland between the ages of 16-19 who are in this group, which represents 13.5% of the total population between these ages. However, the Executive estimate that the figure for those who will need some additional support to access and sustain opportunities in the labour market is more likely to be around 20,000 ³, or 7.7% of 16-19 year olds. This level is high in comparison to other OECD countries.

1.6 The NEET group is heterogeneous and dynamic and consists of a wide range of young people from different circumstances and backgrounds. Figure 1.1⁴ outlines the complex influences on the NEET group and those young people at risk of becoming NEET.

Figure 1.1: NEET Group Influences

1.7 The Executive's target strategy, 'More Choices, More Chances' identifies sub-groups that are most at risk of becoming NEET, with a strong recognition of the differing levels of support needed within each of these sub-groups. These included care leavers, carers, young offenders, young parents, low attainers, persistent truants, young people with physical/mental disabilities, and young people misusing drugs or alcohol.

1.8 The NEET group is characterised by low educational attainment and those who are in it are likely to be viewed as socially disadvantaged and at high risk of social exclusion and becoming economically inactive throughout their adult life. The seven NEET 'hotspots' highlighted by the Scottish Executive include Glasgow, West Dunbartonshire, North Ayrshire, East Ayrshire, Clackmannanshire, Inverclyde, and Dundee.

The Educational Maintenance Allowance ( EMA)

1.9 The EMA provides financial support to 16-19 year olds who come from low income families - the threshold for qualification is £30,810 per annum household income - and takes the form of means-tested payments of £10, £20 and £30 per week. This is subject to full time (minimum of 21.5 hours per week) school or college attendance. Twice-yearly bonuses of £150 are awarded to students provided the terms of a learning agreement are met. These would normally include attendance, behaviour and achievement targets set with the student's educator.

1.10 The EMA Guidance and Scottish Business Model ⁵ provides detailed guidelines on the payment of the allowance and the bonus and it contains several caveats that allow some aspects of its guidelines, e.g. exceptions to 100% attendance, to have a number of interpretations.

1.11 The latest national statistics ⁶ show that there were around 36,460 young people receiving an EMA in Scotland in 2005-06 with a total of £29.3 million paid out to recipients. Around 62% received both bonuses, and 88% one bonus.

1.12 Financial incentives have been found to be an important factor in encouraging those at risk of becoming NEET to consider their education, employment and training ( EET) options. The evidence from the literature suggests that young people undertake 'rational' decision making ⁷ in weighing up their EET options. Therefore, there is an evidenced theoretical underpinning to the belief that the availability of financial incentives and support will influence the EET choices made by young people.

The EMA as a NEET Prevention Tool

1.13 The early launch of the EMA across the UK identified the intervention more specifically as a financial support tool, which aimed to retain young people in school beyond the post-compulsory schooling stage.

1.14 More recently, the development of Scotland's NEET strategy - ' More Choices, More Chances', has further shaped and defined the EMA as a potential NEET prevention tool. The following quotes demonstrate this:

"While EMAs have the primary policy objective of increasing participation and retention, an analysis of EMA related reductions in the NEET group allows for an indication in the potential long-term impact of achieving these primary objectives. It would enable the policy to be tested against a measure that reveals whether EMAs are enabling at risk young people to enter education, employment or training or whether they are simply deferring a ' NEET'' outcome for those same young people….the Scottish Executive will commission further research to test the impact of EMAs on changing outcomes for young people at risk of becoming NEET and will assess ways in which to maximise the potential of EMAs to encourage retention, attainment and progression for young people in sub-groups who are known to be at risk of becoming NEET"⁸.

1.15 These quotes show that - as the NEET policy agenda has developed - the potential importance of the EMA as a NEET prevention tool has emerged. However, this development has yet to be translated at the implementation (or operational) stage - i.e. in Education Authorities, FE Colleges and schools. In these operational settings, the EMA is still largely viewed as a financial support tool.

1.16 Whilst this study was commissioned to explore the EMA as a NEET prevention tool, it was difficult for stakeholders to comment on the EMA's effect on the potential NEET group, as the relevant communications or mechanisms are not currently in place to support, promote and reinforce the EMA as this type of tool.

Method

Sample Selection

1.17 Five Education Authority ( EA) areas participated in this study. These areas were selected due to a combination of factors - e.g. availability to participate, some are NEET 'hotspots', some, like Glasgow and Dundee were involved in the pilot EMA scheme, some have higher than average unemployment rates. The participants were:

• Clackmannanshire
• Dundee
• Glasgow
• Inverclyde
• North Lanarkshire

1.18 A summarised profile of key data from these 5 EA areas is detailed in Table 1.1 below.

Table 1.1: Overview of Selected LA Areas

1.19 Across the 5 areas 29 establishments (6 colleges and 23 secondary schools) were identified to participate in the research.

1.20 In order to minimise burden on the schools and colleges, and in recognition of the volume of ongoing research, a pragmatic approach was taken to selecting establishments. Schools and colleges were approached once checks had been made that the institutions were not already involved in other related research.

Table 1.2: Number of Educational Establishments in Each Area

Stakeholders

1.21 Telephone or face to face consultations were conducted with 37 stakeholders in schools, colleges, EAs and the Scottish Funding Council ( SFC). This provided a local and EA-wide perspective of the processes and perceived impacts of the EMA.

Young People

1.22 Schools and colleges were asked to select 8-10 young people that fell into particular categories

• age-ineligible pupils at school in S3 and S4 aged 14-15 who schools felt might be at risk of becoming NEET
• 16+ year old pupils and students not in receipt of the EMA
• 16+ year old pupils and students in receipt of the EMA
• 16+ year old pupils and students in receipt of the EMA but who had not received all their weekly allowances and or bonus (in an attempt to possibly capture within this group some people who might be at risk of becoming NEET)

1.23 This range of pupils and students were consulted in order to capture a breadth of circumstances and views, concerning the EMA and their decision making processes.

1.24 The EMA coordinator in schools or bursary officers in FE colleges were provided with details of the four categories of young people that the researchers wanted to consult with and identified pupils and students on this basis. Those young people that took part received a £10 voucher.

1.25 Whilst this approach proved successful, schools highlighted the difficulties in identifying and including young people who were NEET or at risk of being NEET. Mainly because:

• the NEET group, by their very nature had in many cases already become disengaged and 'lost' to the schools
• some schools were reluctant to label young people as at risk of becoming NEET
• some were concerned about how the 'at risk of NEET' group, might behave/communicate with the visiting consultants

1.26 As a result there was slight concern that some schools selected the 'best' 14-15 yr old pupils to be involved in the consultations but this is balanced by the inclusion of some clearly disengaged young people pre-statutory leaving age - this type of pupil was less easy to engage in discussions, more reluctant to voice their views or had very little to say.

1.27 Paired interviews and focus groups were undertaken with 197 pupils in 23 schools and 32 students in 6 colleges and this amounted to:

• 118 non-recipients of the EMA - S3 and S4 age-ineligible pupils (66) and 16+ year old pupils not eligible for the EMA, e.g. due to parental income, (52)
• 111 EMA recipients - 54 young people in receipt of the weekly allowance and the bonus payments and 57 recipients with weekly or bonus payments stopped

Research Tools

1.28 A series of topic guides were designed to use during discussions with the four groups of young people, the EA stakeholders and the EMA Co-ordinators and Bursary Officers. The four groups of young people also completed proformas that captured personal information and details relating to their perceptions of the EMA.

1.29 These proformas were completed prior to the interviews with young people and on some occasions the young person was not available for the qualitative discussion and subsequently not interviewed. This was the case with 7 young people and therefore there are 236 completed proformas and 229 young people interviewed.

1.30 The research tools were piloted at a school in North Lanarkshire, testing all the topic guides and proformas on young people and stakeholders and these were amended in response to their feedback. Examples of all the research tools can be found in Appendix 1.

Interpretation of Data and Research Limitations

1.31 The qualitative interviews provide a way of probing the underlying attitudes of participants and obtaining an understanding of the issues of importance. The real value of qualitative research undertaken in this way is that it allows insight into attitudes, and the reasons for these, which could not be probed in as much depth as within a structured questionnaire.

1.32 When interpreting these findings, it should be remembered that results are not based on quantitative statistical evidence but on a sample of young people aged 14+ with a range of awareness and experience of the EMA as well as stakeholders with experience of the EMA.

1.33 In Chapter 3, use is made of pen pictures (brief descriptive accounts and examples) and verbatim comments from the interviewees. These have been selected to exemplify a particular view of a body of consultees, although it is important to remember that the views expressed do not always represent the views of all those being researched. To aid the anonymity of our respondents, verbatim quotes and pen pictures are loosely referenced by age and gender.

1.34 The quantitative proformas were also analysed and form part of this report and the analysis of the proformas have been used to reinforce the findings from the qualitative research. In some cases there is a 'disconnect' in terms of the findings of the qualitative research and the information obtained from the quantitative proformas. For example, when the 14-15 year olds completed the proformas, their awareness of the EMA appears to be much higher than the responses they gave during the qualitative discussions.

1.35 This highlights the inherent differences in the quantitative approach where there is a greater inclination to 'tick the box' and give a definite answer compared to the qualitative interviews which allow more room for discussion and greater ambiguity. In cases where the different methodological approaches have resulted in conflicting responses then this is acknowledged in the text.

1.36 As with all research, there are a number of limitations to this study and these include:

• the reliability of self-reporting - the age of the young people involved in this study means that, for some consultees, there was still a significant degree of uncertainty over future plans. This impacted upon their ability to consider and articulate decisions and ideas about future plans and pathways. In other cases, there was, a tendency for young people to downplay where EMA payments had been withheld ( e.g. due to attendance issues). There were several instances where the information provided by individual young people conflicted with that provided by school staff. In order to protect anonymity, it was not possible to address any such ambiguities
• the difficulty in attributing any positive changes to the EMA - proving a possible direct relationship between EMA and staying on at school or college is complex, due to the number of factors which may have influenced this decision. As the EMA is available throughout Scotland, attribution was made more difficult as it was not possible to assess the counterfactual - the pupils' intentions in the absence of the EMA - through identification and examination of an appropriate comparator student cohort
• quantifying responses and themes - it was not possible to simply 'tally' themes which have emerged to offer percentages or numbers of individuals offering particular views. This is because views and opinions stated often emerged as a result of the dialogue taking place during consultation, and not in response to particular questions. However, where themes have emerged clearly from within the groups being consulted, these have been noted and differentiated by use of the terms 'a few', 'some', 'many' and 'most'
• identifying long term outcomes and impacts - outcomes in relation to the longer term impact on choices and pathways beyond the evaluation period cannot be ascertained. Whilst there is statistical evidence to show that those with fewer qualifications who leave school at the minimum leaving age are more likely to experience longer spells of NEET¹⁴, in this study, as such, it is not possible to establish whether staying on at school reduces the risk of becoming NEET thereafter
• representativeness - the qualitative focus of the study and case study approach used means that we cannot generalise findings to either EA area or total population / sub-groups in receipt of the EMA. Rather, the data elicits patterns which might exist across the wider group of EMA recipients

1.37 Despite these limitations, it should be noted that intensive research did take place in and across 5 EA areas. During that time:

• 23 schools and six colleges were visited
• 229 young people were interviewed
• 37 stakeholders were consulted
• 236 ¹⁵ proformas were completed with young people

1.38 These figures offer robust samples to provide a strong indication of the awareness, experience and impact of the EMA on young people's choices and pathways.

Report Outline

1.39 The remainder of this report is structured as follows:

• in Chapter 2 we present information on the EMA process, drawn from EA, SFC and school/college stakeholders in relation to:
  
  - EMA Promotion and Awareness-raising

• Application Process, EMA Guidance & Payments
• Monitoring, Reporting and Management

• Chapter 3 reports on the awareness and experience of the EMA amongst pupils and students, covering:
  
  - awareness amongst the three groups of young people - those age eligible but not in receipt of the EMA, those in receipt, and the pre- EMA group in S3 and S4
  - the recipients' experience of EMAs

• in Chapter 4 the views of all stakeholders and young people are considered with regard to the impact of the EMA, the key influences on young people's decision making, the benefits and negative effects of the EMA and consultees' suggestions for change and improvements
• finally, in Chapter 5 we summarise and highlight the key points raised in this report

1.40 At the end of the report, there is a reference section and two appendices:

• the research tools that were used to conduct the study ( Appendix 1)
• Appendix 2 - data tables highlighting the responses to key questions from the proformas completed by the young people

« Previous | Contents | Next »