Beijing, China – 13 Sep 2026 – Following the issuance of the revised “Five Measures” governing leaders of public institutions in the propaganda, ideological and cultural system, higher education, primary and secondary schools, scientific research institutions and public hospitals, officials of the Central Organization Department and the four co‑issuing departments – the Central Publicity Department, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Science and Technology and National Health Commission – answered reporters’ questions, detailing the revision’s background, guiding principles and sector‑specific provisions, including 5‑year experience thresholds for school and hospital leaders, mandatory full‑coverage training every five years, academic “inbreeding” recusal rules and rewards for technology‑achievement transformation.

Policy Milestone

Item	Detail
Issuing Bodies	Central Organization Department, jointly with the Central Publicity Department, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Science and Technology, and NHC
Documents	Revised Five Measures – management rules for leaders of public institutions in the propaganda/ideological/cultural system, higher education, primary & secondary schools, research institutions, and public hospitals
Announcement	13 Sep 2026 (Xinhua), accompanied by a press Q&A with officials of the five departments
Institutional Framework	The “1+5” system: 2015 provisional regulations → 2017 original Five Measures → 2022 revised Management Regulations → 2026 Five Measures revised for alignment
Revision Drivers	Alignment with the 2022 Management Regulations; new central requirements for sector reform; deepening public‑institution reform; resolving problems identified in practice and through inspection and disciplinary patrols
Drafting Principles	Problem‑oriented; sector‑specific (public‑interest, service, professional and technical characteristics); coordinated with recent cadre and sector policies; streamlined text

Political & Leadership Requirements

• Party Leadership Codified: The general provisions explicitly require upholding and strengthening the Party’s overall leadership and Party management of cadres and talent; selection and appointment must give full play to the leading and gatekeeping role of Party organizations.
• Gatekeeper Qualities: Party organization secretaries must be “politically strong, versed in Party building and professional work” with the ability to command the overall situation; execution of democratic centralism is emphasized in qualification conditions.
• Political Standards First: Deeply comprehending the decisive significance of the “Two Establishes,” enhancing the “Four Consciousnesses,” fortifying the “Four Confidences” and upholding the “Two Safeguards” are established as the primary appointment requirement; political‑quality assessment is to be “deepened and solidified,” with sector‑differentiated examination priorities and strengthened political supervision.
• Decision‑Making Mechanisms: Sector Measures require upholding and improving the administrative‑leader responsibility system under Party committee leadership, sound deliberation and decision‑making mechanisms, and explicit lists of decision items.

Sector‑Specific Professional Competence Thresholds

• Propaganda/Ideological/Cultural System: Leaders must possess the theoretical level, professional knowledge and competence for their posts, and consciously strengthen “foot strength, eye strength, brain strength and pen strength.”
• Universities: Leaders with teaching or research backgrounds should generally make up about half of leadership team members.
• Primary & Secondary Schools: Party secretaries should generally have 5+ years of Party affairs or education management experience in the education system; principals should generally have 5+ years of education and teaching experience.
• Research Institutions: Administrative heads and deputies in charge of operations should generally have experience in research management or research work in the relevant field.
• Public Hospitals: Leaders should have 5+ years of medical and health work experience, or management experience in other relevant fields.

Appraisal, Exchange & Recusal System

• Differentiated Appraisal: Performance evaluation stresses differentiation and targeting to make appraisal a genuine “command baton.” Sector emphases include ideological position management (propaganda system), teacher ethics and conduct (universities and schools), sci‑tech innovation capability, quality, effectiveness and contribution (research institutions), and linkage with public hospital performance monitoring to prevent profit‑seeking tendencies (hospitals).
• Service‑Recipient Input: Appraisal methods emphasize soliciting opinions and evaluations from service recipients and optimizing procedures; specific ratios for annual “excellent” ratings of leadership teams and individuals are set to guide practice.
• Leader Exchange (Rotation): Rotation requirements are tailored to optimizing higher‑education layout and regional resource allocation, balanced quality compulsory education and urban‑rural integration, and the expansion and downward extension of quality medical resources; rotation of highly professional leaders must leverage their expertise to prevent resource mismatch and talent waste.
• Academic Recusal Rules: Addressing “academic inbreeding” in universities, research institutions and hospitals, leaders must recuse themselves from matters involving graduate students they directly supervise, their own academic teams and members, or other conflicts of interest that could affect impartial performance of duties; small or special‑circumstance schools in rural and remote border areas may apply tenure‑recusal rules flexibly according to actual conditions.

Incentives & Strict Management

• Training: Sector‑specific training priorities are defined, with full‑coverage training of leaders in principle every five years; Party theory and spirit education anchor the curriculum.
• Young Cadres & Composite Talent: Regular, standing mechanisms for cultivating and selecting excellent young cadres are required; schools and hospitals must build reserves of composite leaders strong in both Party building and professional work.
• Income & Transformation Rewards: Normal wage growth and deeper income‑distribution reform are emphasized; university and research institution leaders may receive rewards for the transformation of scientific and technological achievements per regulations.
• Autonomy & Care: Unit‑level political/administrative authority lists are to be refined to safeguard institutional autonomy, with strengthened positive incentives, humanistic care and attention to physical and mental health.
• Strict Oversight: Strict observance of political discipline and rules is a basic appointment condition; selection enforces “five checkpoints” – political, moral, capability, work‑style and integrity; tenure systems, term‑objective responsibility systems and leadership‑transition handover requirements are refined; appraisal results serve as a key basis for team building, appointment, training, supervision, incentives and accountability; sector‑differentiated grounds for adjusting leaders unsuited to current posts (“able to go up and down”) are detailed.

Market Impact & Outlook

• Public Hospital Governance: The 5‑year medical/health experience threshold, appraisal linkage to performance monitoring and explicit anti‑profit‑seeking language tighten the governance frame for public hospital leadership – relevant to hospital procurement behavior, KPI design and management stability.
• Research Institution Leadership: Professional‑background requirements plus transformation rewards aim to professionalize research management while incentivizing commercialization of publicly funded science.
• Education Sector Rotation: Targeted exchange rules for universities and schools support national goals of regional education balance and urban‑rural integration, with personnel implications for school leadership pipelines.
• Effective Dates: Implementation timelines and transitional arrangements were not disclosed in the Q&A.

Forward‑Looking Statements
This brief contains forward‑looking statements regarding the implementation of the revised Five Measures for public institution leadership management, including appointment practices, appraisal systems, exchange and recusal enforcement, and incentive mechanisms. Actual outcomes may differ due to risks including sector‑level implementation guidance, institutional practices, and subsequent policy adjustments by the relevant authorities.-China Health Reform Pulse

Policy Source: https://www.nhc.gov.cn/wjw/mtbd/202609/a61748aa9de34dbca3cf60544cccd373.shtml