too reliant on "computer systems and drop-down menus". In the executive summary of his report, he wrote that he "found that the WCA is not working as well as it should. There are clear and consistent criticisms of the whole system and much negativity surrounding the process...[but] I do not believe the system is broken or beyond repair. I am proposing a substantial series of recommendations to improve the fairness and effectiveness of the WCA. If adopted, I believe these changes can have a positive impact on the process." He made 25 recommendations, with his changes he advised to the core assessment being: The criteria for judging mental function and cognitive ability should be refined "Champions" should be identified within Atos to spread best practice for gauging mental and cognitive disabilities Each report should be summarised in plain English The claim form should be redrafted. Deaths and suicides blamed on WCA The DWP accepts that being found fit for work and ineligible for sickness benefit can, in some circumstances, harm a recipient's physical or mental health. For this reason, one of the WCA's eligibility criteria — the non-functional descriptor Substantial Risk — applies where there is, on balance, more than a small risk of harm if the claimant were to be declared 'fit for work'. In these circumstances, the at-risk person should be given the benefit. Post-mortem case reviews The DWP has looked into the deaths of at least 49 benefit claimants. Most died after undergoing a WCA. The department was compelled to publish their findings in May 2016 after a campaign by Disability News Service. The conclusions of the heavily redacted reports included: A "persistent area of possible concern" was "a dislocation between policy intent and what actually happens to claimants who may be vulnerable" The Incapacity Benefit reassessment programme lacked a clear system for identifying vulnerable recipients DWP staff did not always check the DWP's database for indicators that claimants were at risk The WCA's medical criteria for identifying risk were not properly applied Claimants with cognitive problems were not filling in their claim forms in the manner that the DWP had envisaged (or at all) Requests by claimants for a reconsideration of the department's initial decision - while waiting for which, the claimant receives no sickness benefit - were not prioritised in a "common sense" way Appeal dates for tribunals took too long The failure to apply