Why the Netherlands Builds Bridges Instead of Cliffs for Young People at Risk of Becoming NEET

Across Europe we share a common concern: how do we prevent young people from disappearing from education, employment and training?

In England, the term NEET has become familiar to everyone working in Further Education. Colleges, local authorities and training providers invest enormous effort into re-engagement programmes, yet many young people still experience what practitioners often describe as “cliff edges”. A student leaves school because of anxiety, behavioural challenges, family circumstances or mental health difficulties, and suddenly the support network disappears. The next step is often unclear, fragmented or delayed.

The Netherlands faces many of the same challenges. Young people struggle with anxiety, neurodiversity, school refusal and increasing pressure to perform. However, one significant difference is that our education system increasingly tries to create bridges before students reach the cliff.

Those bridges are rarely one single programme. Instead, they consist of flexible partnerships between schools, municipalities, youth care, specialist educational organisations and families.

This collaborative approach is where I believe the UK can draw valuable lessons.

We stop asking “Why isn’t this student attending school?”

Instead, we ask:

“What does this student need to start learning again?”

That sounds like a subtle distinction, but it fundamentally changes the response.

When attendance becomes the only measure of success, young people who cannot currently cope with mainstream education quickly become labelled as absent. When learning remains the goal, even if it temporarily happens elsewhere, the pathway remains open.

In the Netherlands we increasingly recognise that education does not have to stop simply because attendance at one particular school has become impossible.

Education should be flexible without lowering expectations

One misconception is that alternative provision means reducing academic expectations.

In our experience, the opposite is true. Young people who have disengaged often retain considerable academic ability. What has broken down is not their capacity to learn but their relationship with school.

That distinction matters enormously.

At mooi jong Academie, for example, students continue following their curriculum while receiving intensive support in executive functioning, emotional wellbeing, study skills and confidence. The educational programme is personalised and can operate between one and five days per week, depending on individual needs. Throughout the process, progress is shared with schools and parents through digital monitoring so that everyone works from the same information.

The objective is never to replace mainstream education. The objective is to make returning to education possible.

Academic and emotional development cannot be separated

Many education systems still separate academic support from wellbeing support. One professional addresses mathematics. Another addresses mental health. Another works on behaviour. Families often become responsible for coordinating these separate services.

In reality, these issues are deeply interconnected.

A student struggling with anxiety may appear to have poor concentration. Executive functioning difficulties may present as lack of motivation. Repeated academic failure can quickly become emotional distress. Supporting only one aspect rarely solves the whole problem.

This is why integrated teams are becoming increasingly important within Dutch educational support. Teachers, remedial specialists, behavioural experts and coaches work together around one shared plan rather than operating independently. The emphasis is on understanding the student as a whole rather than simply treating isolated problems.

Small interventions prevent larger problems

One of the most valuable lessons we have learned is that timing matters.

The earlier support begins, the less intensive it usually needs to become. Waiting until a student has been absent for months often means rebuilding confidence from scratch. Intervening when attendance first begins to decline is significantly more effective.

Schools increasingly recognise that preventing educational disengagement is considerably less expensive, both financially and socially, than attempting to reconnect young people after prolonged absence.

This preventive mindset represents a major shift.

Rather than asking who is responsible once a young person becomes NEET, we ask what can be done before they ever reach that point.

Success should be measured by transitions

Educational systems naturally focus on qualifications.

But for vulnerable learners, successful transitions are often equally important.

Can the student return to school? Can they move into vocational education? Can they rebuild routines? Can they regain confidence? Can they eventually progress into employment?

These milestones matter because education is rarely a straight line.

For some young people, simply attending consistently for several weeks represents extraordinary progress. Recognising those achievements creates momentum for the next step.

Collaboration matters more than structure

People often ask whether the Dutch model succeeds because our education system is fundamentally different.

I believe the answer is no.

Structures certainly help. Funding arrangements matter. Legislation matters. But collaboration matters even more.

The most successful outcomes occur when schools remain connected to students even when those students temporarily learn elsewhere. When municipalities, educational providers and families share information. When support plans are coordinated instead of duplicated. Most importantly, when everyone continues believing that the student belongs within education, even if the route back looks different from the original plan.

The future of education is flexibility

Young people today face very different challenges from those of twenty years ago.

Mental health concerns are increasing. Neurodiversity is better recognised. Digital life changes how students learn, communicate and experience pressure. Education systems cannot respond to these challenges using only traditional models. Flexibility is no longer an optional extra. It is becoming an essential characteristic of inclusive education. That does not mean lowering standards. It means creating multiple pathways towards the same destination.

Building bridges instead of cliffs

No country has solved the challenge of preventing young people from becoming NEET. The Netherlands certainly has room for improvement. However, one principle has proven particularly valuable:

Never allow a young person to feel that leaving one educational setting means leaving education itself. Every transition should include another bridge.

Sometimes that bridge is temporary specialist provision. Sometimes it is coaching. Sometimes it is personalised teaching. Sometimes it is simply a team of professionals refusing to give up. The question is not whether a young person fits the system.

The question should always be whether the system is flexible enough to keep that young person learning.

If we can continue building bridges instead of cliffs, far fewer young people will ever find themselves disconnected from education, employment and their own future.

By Alexander Koppelle, Founder & Director, mooi jong

Alexander Koppelle is Founder and Director of mooi jong, an educational support organisation based in The Hague, Netherlands. Working in partnership with schools, municipalities and families, mooi jong provides personalised educational programmes, coaching and specialist support for young people at risk of educational disengagement, helping them successfully transition back into mainstream education or onward to further learning.

---