...but it kind of has to.
If you're applying this from a socialist concept it would fail if only because what you say as basic is going to be interpreted as "cheap must have support".
Again see why not all people pursue trade schools. It's the psychological flaw of it's principle and in things not dealing with life or death like healthcare (and even with healthcare depending on the doctor-patient culture) you're talking about an institution where the worst of gov support is going to there, where society especially parents would induce guilt upon students to attend and in general you're dealing with forcing people to go to a place where they don't see the benefits of.
However if you can create/establish an institution where teachers need to trade between going to that place or going to a poor troublesome school for their year 1-3 training/teaching experience, this changes things around because now the instructors there have a certain incentive to view people as an alternative form of poor people which means now you have an actual school setting rather than a school excuse setting for the staff. That makes it more capitalist minded if only because the staff has to worry about their positions. Nothing revolutionary but at least you have a quality safety net. That is the thing that you need to start establishing the reputation of such a place.
The 2nd thing needed is to change the culture and the concept of what is employment 101. If you look at it from a socialist concept, then employment 101 will be as what the critics said. A far inferior place to learn how to get a job especially in countries with decent community colleges to begin with.
A capitalist mindset doesn't work here either because as the better this place goes, the more there's going to be a pyramid scheme to nab very special underdog stories to sell the place for future enrollments. Basically becoming a chartered public school functioning closer to a 3rd world private school.
You have to be libertarian about it. That is to say, you have to reform employment 101 from employment to employment mobility 101. You have to allow for courses that these people don't just have to learn but these people aren't able to acquire if they go the normal school route. Unpopular courses are a good start for this.
The reason for this are that unpopular courses may be unpopular because no one sees the opportunity for it but by opting for this route, instead of competing with schools, you are providing instead additional associated knowledge which would help boost new entrepreneurial ideas for many of these students. Will that guarantee employment? No.
It would guarantee mobility however for the first sets of students who could make those courses work because it provides them with a set of classmates that are potential "already trained" employees for their new idea.
The reason I say it has to be libertarian is because you can't build upon the success of one course or the self-capability of a set of students as that will make it vulnerable towards market factors such as the trickle down effect.
You want this place to be as mobile as possible and training people to be as mobile as possible and yes, initially you have to opt-in people, but the most important factor is that you have to redefine success, failure, employment, opportunities, metrics in order for both this place and the student to survive and grow.
If you're just treating this place as a meat shop, it's going to be a meat shop. If you're treating this place as a free prison with training, it's going to have close to the same failure rate as a public school.
It's also going to be very difficult to sell the success of this school long term both to it's provides (gov/investors/etc) and to future students coming in who will train themselves to dodge the lessons like how they try to pretend through anger management classes. The draconian staff is also going to become less draconian and just more stupid and robotic. None are what's going to preserve the school much less progress it.
You have to have a school that is able to prepare even the below average ones to want to be future staff for this school even if their ideas don't pan out. You have to have students trained in basic skills but with the associated knowledge of how to befriend and work together with their fellow classmates to utilize these projects. Again, mobility is very important. Even in the poorest places of Africa, if you can get a bunch of Africans to band together and try their luck in a country with more liberal minded people and far freer government intervening concepts, they have more chances of not wanting to return as NEETs even if they fail in their project if only because they have more reason to view cash beyond currency, jobs beyond corporate slot machines and ideas beyond mere holes that you have to fill correctly to get a business off.
It's a tough thing to pull off and just this reply is bound to tick someone off into accusing me of misrepresenting these political mindset but regardless of the difficulty that's what a place like this needs. It needs a free market thinking culture that, even if the actual place fails, you can train and regrow current students into a trailer for example or renting inconsistent rooms while continue the ongoing lessons in a standardized philosophy that's culturally organic, prone to mobility regardless of and especially in spite of failure and a staff that understands why that's necessary because if there's one thing that can separate this from other learning environments - it's that it's aimed at helping NEETs change their culture not necessarily aimed at helping the great and talented NEETS from finding their motivation to get themselves employed. That and that there are actual schools/trainings for the poor. It's not poverty that creates a NEET alone. It's different factors and if those factors aren't addressed, long term, it is going to produce non-NEETs who are non-NEETs for the wrong reasons. (i.e. they have the same NEET culture but they are not seen as one because they have and are doing jobs and work for the wrong reasons.)