Dr Richard Benn Also known as Greystones Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence the service met people’s needs, and staff treated people equally and without discrimination. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service performed better than national averages in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or through the service’s website. For example, 84% of respondents to the survey responded positively to how easy it was to contact the practice on the phone, compared to a national average of 53%.

The service operated a total GP triage appointment system. Treatment rooms were located on the ground floor for individuals with mobility needs. A ramp and accessible parking were also in place to support access to the premises. Although the entrance door was not automatic, the provider had carried out a risk assessment and was considering options to improve access to the service.

Interpreter services were available for those whose first language was not English.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. For example, patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable such as those with a learning disability or dementia were offered appointments at quieter times.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The service was registered as a “Safe Surgery” (a practice that has pledged to provide equitable access to healthcare for everyone in their community, particularly those in vulnerable circumstances, such as migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, and people experiencing homelessness). Those patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable were supported to register with the service.

Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was mostly positive about accessing the service.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.