Objective To establish a scientific and feasible indicator system for evaluation of schools of public health in China. Methods Literature review was conducted to initially explore the indicators of evaluation of schools of public health in China. Delphi method was employed to carry out two rounds of expert consultations. In the first round, experts were selected from higher education institutes of public health in China as objects for consultation (n=83), and questionnaires on evaluation indicators and weights were sent to them by E-mail. In the second round, new questionnaires on evaluation indicators and weights based on the results of the first-round consultation were sent to experts with response to the first-round consultation. Then, the evaluation indicators and weights were ultimately established. The concept of results chain (including input, process and output) was employed to set the framework of the indicator system. Results Fifteen copies of effective questionnaires were recovered in the first-round consultation, and the effective response rate was 18.1%. In the second-round consultation, 10 copies of effective questionnaires were received, and the effective response rate was 66.7%. The average response time of the second-round consultation was 2.30 d, 1.57 d shorter than the first-round consultation (3.87 d). The average age of experts involved was more than 48 years old, with the average related working time over 23 years. Through Kendall-W test, the score given by the experts in the second-round consultation to each indicator of each grade was of concordance with statistical significance (P=0.000). The evaluation indicator system of schools of public health in China was finally set up by 3 levels (input, process, output), which was made up of 7 first-grade indicators (human input, property input, management mode, school culture, human output, scientific output and social services), 40 second-grade indicators and their related weights. Conclusion “Superior's funds and subsidy”, “percentage of faculties with doctor's degree”, “introduction of advanced talents”, “scientific research funding input” and “number of publications of international journals （cited by SCI）” are the 5 second-grade indicators with largest weight in evaluation indicator system of schools of public health in China. Qualitative evaluation or layered assessment by choosing standards can be applied to such indicators which are hard to quantify. Schools of public health should lay more emphasis on indicators of social work and increase the overall levels as well.
