• Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr Neeta Ghosh-Chowdhury Also known as Hilltop Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

150 Hilltop Avenue, Harlesden, London, NW10 8RY (020) 3188 7250

Provided and run by:
Dr Neeta Ghosh-Chowdhury

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: Remote clinical searches were carried out on 4 February 2026 and the site visit took place on 13 February 2026.

Dr Neeta Ghosh-Chowdhury (Hilltop Medical Practice) is a GP practice that has been managed single-handedly since its CQC registration in April 2013. The practice was last assessed in April 2016. This comprehensive assessment was undertaken because of the length of time since the last assessment.

Dr Neeta Ghosh-Chowdhury is a GP Practice that delivers General Medical Service (GMS) to approximately 5,007 patients in the London Borough of Brent under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profile stated that the population make up for this location is 19.1% Asian, 27.6% White, 35.6% Black, 6.1% Mixed and 11.6% other non-white ethnic groups.

Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population is in the 1st decile (1 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This practice is in the lowest decile indicating it is in a most deprived area on the national scale. 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.

There were no breaches currently at this location and what we found is as follows:

Safe: People and staff were kept safe and protected from harm and abuse. The practice recorded significant events and learning shared with the practice staff. Risks were understood and managed by the staff. The Infection Prevention and Control policy was specific to the practice and regular audits were completed. However, staff did not have regular appraisals and there were gaps in staff relevant training which the provider identified prior to CQC visit and had developed an action plan to address the concerns.

Effective: People were involved in the assessment of their needs. Patients were invited for their health checks reviews. The practice delivered services in line with good practice. The practice worked with relevant stakeholders to achieve best outcomes for the patient population. Information was shared with the patients to ensure they made an informed decision about their health care needs. However, there was an action plan to improve the uptake of cervical screening and childhood immunisations among the patient population identified not to be engaging with these programmes.

Caring: People were treated with kindness and compassion by the clinical staff. The dignity and privacy of patients were respected. Staff felt valued and appreciated. Staff wellbeing was treated with the utmost importance by the service.

Responsive: People received services that were in line with the Equality Act. An interpreting services was made available to patients who needed them. Complaints were handled carefully and timely.

Well-led: The leadership and the management of the practice operated an open-door policy and shared vision of the practice with the staff. The leadership and management had a clear understanding of equality, human rights and safe compassionate care. Members of staff understood their roles and responsibilities and felt supported.

23 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at 8.30am on 23 February 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they could get an appointment within a reasonable time with urgent appointments available the same day. However, an appointment with the principal GP was not always easy to book.

  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Develop a formal strategy to deliver the practice vision.

  • Review the long-term sustainability of current staffing levels.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

16 December 2013

During a routine inspection

During this inspection, we spoke with three patients. They confirmed that they had been treated with respect and dignity and were satisfied with the services provided. One patient told us, "I find her very good. She is a very good GP. I have been treated with respect'. Another patient said, 'The GP understand us and our culture. We are well treated and get good treatment'.

Patients said they received the care and treatment they needed. They said they had no problems getting an appointment to see a doctor although sometimes it took longer than they would like. Records indicated that patients were carefully assessed and their care and treatment had been carefully monitored. Reviews of care and treatment with the GP took place and these were recorded.

The practice had a recruitment policy. Essential checks had not been carried out on new staff working in the practice. Staff had been provided with essential training and updates. They were aware of action to take when responding to allegations or incidents of abuse.

The practice had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that patients received. Two recent patient surveys indicated that people were satisfied with the quality of services provided. There was a Patients' Participation Group.