Qualitative analysis explores training pathways for care-experienced youth, highlighting unique challenges and needs.
Care-experienced young people often face considerable challenges due to a personal history of trauma and disruption and have a higher risk of homelessness, mental ill health, and involvement with the criminal justice system. A stubborn trend of achieving fewer qualifications than non-care-experienced peers persists, with greater likelihood of becoming NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training). Accessible and sustainable pre-employment programmes should be a priority for national initiatives designed to generate improved outcomes for vulnerable youth. The I-CAN (Initiating and Supporting Care Leavers into Apprenticeships in Nursing) programme offers young people in England (aged 18–30) a person-focussed pathway to training and employment. However, robust research is needed to evidence the effectiveness of this type of small-scale and short-term funded programme. The current paper reports qualitative findings from a pilot study exploring the perceptions and experiences of (N = 27) young people who attended the 8-week I-CAN programme delivered at a Higher Education Institution. Data were collected from four focus groups and thematically analysed. The findings captured young people’s personal trajectories and exposed underpinning processes as well as unique, shared, and intersectional factors that can either facilitate or impede progression to education, employment and training. Crucially, care-experienced young people are not a homogenous group and capturing their authentic, diverse voices in evaluation research is essential for not only assessing if a programme works but for whom, and why. Furthermore, findings can help to inform meaningful strategies and socially valid interventions to support care-experienced young people navigate the transition ‘cliff edge’.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jayman et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: