Recent weeks have brought good news for the civil service Fast Stream.
Last week’s recruitment data release (for the cohort just starting the scheme) revealed a record number of applicants – 72,691, 11% higher than the previous peak of 64,697 (from 2020). This reverses the post-pandemic drop in interest in the programme which the Institute for Government and others previously raised concerns about. And it follows the recent announcement that the civil service has regained the top spot in The Times graduate employer ranking. The scheme is clearly not struggling to attract graduate talent.
This wave of good news also presents a major opportunity. Healthy and growing levels of interest in the programme from talented graduates (even if – as is likely – this is related to a tight graduate job market) could, through well-targeted reform efforts, be leveraged to deliver substantial returns for the civil service. In a recent report, we at the IfG made the case for strategic clarity around what the Fast Stream is ‘for’, arguing that it should be focused on identifying and developing future civil service leaders. While the recent statistics show just how selective the recruitment process is, and therefore seemingly well-calibrated to this goal, the civil service must ensure the same is true for fast streamers’ experience on the scheme. And here, there is room for improvement.
Take the size of the scheme. At 754 recommendations for appointment, the 2025 cohort of fast streamers is the smallest in over ten years. This is positive – one of our report’s core recommendations was that fast stream intakes should be smaller, to allow for greater quality assurance of postings and more tailored support for fast streamers. But this reduction in size is largely an accident. As in the past, it has been determined not strategically, with the Cabinet Office taking a long-term view of what the civil service will need from its future leaders, but by short-term, tactical bids for resource from individual departments – now likely constrained by pressures to reduce headcount as well as the rising ‘cost’ of fast streamers following recent pay rises.
This betrays the tension we identified at the heart of the Fast Stream – that its core purpose is not clear. While it is ostensibly a leadership development programme, in reality fast streamers have too often been used simply to plug resourcing gaps. This was evident in our survey and focus groups. Current and former fast streamers repeatedly expressed their dissatisfaction with the quality of postings and the lack of meaningful work – and often explicitly tied them to the scheme having become too large and unwieldy. So there is a strong case for civil service leadership to more firmly grip Fast Stream management, including on decisions around intake sizes, but also beyond them, and angle its operating model towards leadership development.
Our research uncovered other challenges facing fast streamers while on the scheme. Of these, the large numbers of fast streamers leaving the scheme early stood out in particular. Given intakes have started to shrink in size, this has become even more worrying, as it threatens to deplete one of the civil service’s key talent pipelines. To tackle this, the civil service needs to strengthen the case for completing the programme. This means being more selective and directive about the kinds of work fast streamers will be expected to do, as well as beefing up the mentorship offer by matching fast streamers to deputy director mentors in their profession. It also means removing any financial incentives to drop off the scheme – by aligning Fast Stream pay with pay for civil servants outside the scheme but at the same notional grade level.
The large volume of applications also indirectly raises an additional question for the civil service. The Fast Stream’s powerful brand has sometimes tended to overpower that of other talent pipelines into the civil service, with many graduates seeing it as the default ‘way in’ rather than a programme with a very particular function. The lowest success rate on record (1%) makes the issue here even clearer: if the civil service does not succeed in spotlighting other recruitment opportunities, it risks losing tens of thousands of talented graduates – who did not make it on the Fast Stream – to other employers. To ensure it attracts talent into its ranks across the board, the civil service needs to also sharpen its approach to graduate recruitment outside the fast stream.
Recent developments have confirmed the Fast Stream to be one of the most attractive graduate schemes in the country, and the civil service is right to celebrate this. Further improvements to the scheme are needed not because the scheme is failing; they should instead be made precisely to channel the remarkable interest from graduates into ensuring the programme delivers more for the civil service and the country.