I've just done one that commits to single sex accommodation as mandated by Dept of Health and also commits to 'Foster good relations between people who share protected characteristics and those who do not'.
They do mix up gender and sex a bit though. And say 'patient choice' is relevant (though don't say they'll necessarily do whatever a patient wants).
What I liked best was that there was clarity about single and mixed sex accommodation and an indication that patients would be informed if they were going to be put in a mixed sex environment and their consent sought. Rather than deceiving patients and riding roughshod over consent.
I'm not going to name them here just in case it makes them targeted for word salad male supremacist approaches (instead of their short and clear current policies). Knotty will no doubt think about whether we want to name the best. It does at the very least show inconsistency in approach.
Of course, I'm assuming 'single sex' means actually single sex.
Since Dr Upton thinks he's of the female sex despite his male chromosomes, cells and entire body, physiology and anatomy with absolutely no way ever to empirically demonstrate his claimed femaleness, who knows.
The ability of public sector employees to warp the meaning of words to mean the direct opposite of reality and what the people they serve would expect is one of the most dangerous aspects of all this.