- GP practice
Toddington Medical Centre
Assessment report published 20 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 27 August 2026.
Toddington Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 8,600 people under a contract held with NHS England.
According to the latest available data, the ethnic make-up of the service area is approximately 92.7% White, 2.6% Asian, 2.8% Mixed, 1.5% Black and 0.5% Other. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows deprivation within the service population group is in the 9th decile (9 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the service population is relative to others.
This was a focused assessment. We undertook this assessment due to the length of time since our last assessment. We assessed 10 quality statements from across all 5 key questions. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
Staff kept facilities clean and maintained equipment appropriately to ensure people were kept safe. They assessed and managed the risk of infection well and took steps to control the risk of it spreading. The service had enough staff with the appropriate skills, qualifications and experience to meet people's needs.
Staff supported people to live healthier lives, monitoring their care and treatment to ensure they received positive and consistent outcomes.
Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity.
Most people could access care, treatment and support when they needed it. Leaders were working on improving access for patients who require reasonable adjustments. Leaders and staff were aware of factors that could disadvantage some groups of people who used the service and sought ways to address barriers to accessing care, treatment and support, although some people identified opportunities to improve their experience.
The service had a vision and strategy, which considered the needs of the people who used their service and the wider community. Staff understood their individual roles and responsibilities. We identified some gaps in the practice’s governance arrangements including oversight and record keeping. Leaders took action to address this following our assessment.
People's experience of this service
As part of our assessment, we reviewed feedback from people who used the service to understand their views and experience of the service. This included speaking with people using the service at the time of our assessment, reviewing CQC ‘Give Feedback on Care’ comments and other feedback available to us.
People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. They described staff as polite, professional and helpful. This was mirrored in the results of recent surveys, including the 2026 National GP Patient Survey, which showed most people were satisfied. For example, 74% of respondents were positive about their overall experience of contacting their GP practice. This was in line with the national average. Seventy-six percent of respondents were positive about their overall experience of their GP practice. This was also in line with the national average. Feedback gathered from Healthwatch, care home representatives, Friends and Family Test results, and feedback gathered during the inspection broadly reflected these findings.
The practice was in the process of developing a Patient Participation Group (PPG) and had recruited patients to participate. Members who provided feedback were positive about the initiative and keen to be involved in shaping services. Some members described examples of improvements made following patient feedback. For example, we were told that as a result of feedback, improvements were made in relation to how letters from secondary care were reviewed and actioned. Members also identified areas for further improvement, including communication, continuity of care, access arrangements and support for vulnerable patients. As the PPG was still developing, it was too early to determine its effectiveness in influencing service improvement.