Tools and Resources


IANPHI makes available a toolkit for the development of national public health institutes (NPHI) to assist member countries and partners. This section also provides additional IANPHI resources, such as fact sheets, best practices and annual meeting information, as well as external global health resources.

Tool Kit for National Public Health Institutes

IANPHI provides technical assistance to countries that are setting up or enhancing their National Public Health Institutes (NPHI). To assist member countries and partners in these efforts, we are developing a toolkit for NPHI development based on our growing body of experience.

The IANPHI Framework for the Creation and Development of National Public Health Institutes (NPHI) is a guide to the formation and growth of the world's NPHIs.

The Framework provides a common conceptual basis and language for discussing NPHIs, presents models of how they function, and suggests approaches for countries thinking of creating or expanding their NPHIs. The document was developed with extensive review and contributions from several IANPHI member directors and their top advisors. The IANPHI Secretariat and Executive Board also contributed to the materials. 

Learn more

A national public health institute (NPHI) is a government agency, or closely networked group of agencies, that provides science-based leadership, expertise, and coordination for a country’s public health activities. Core NPHI functions help countries organize and conduct their public health services. They are based on the essential public health functions framework, which has been in use for more than a decade. Core NPHI attributes are qualities and characteristics, which define an NPHI’s infrastructure and operations.

The two-page summary at the link below provides an overview of the NPHI core functions and core attributes, as defined in the IANPHI Framework for National Public Health Institute Development.

Learn more

Africa CDC: Framework for the Development of National Public Health Institutes in Africa

Building upon the experience of IANPHI and adapted from IANPHI Framework for National Public Health Institute (NPHI) Development, the Framework for Development of NPHIs is tailored to African context and describes NPHIs, including core aspects of their operations and public health functions.

It includes topics for NPHIs to consider as they develop, such as mandates, guiding principles and activities that are vital to create, strengthen and sustain NPHIs. The appendices can serve as guidance documents for African countries that want to create more robust and effective national public health capacities.

The creation of this document was a collaborative effort between: 

  • Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Human Development and Public Health Initiative, Nigeria
  • International Association of National Public Health Institutes
  • Mozambique Instituto Nacional de Sáude
  • Public Health England
  • South Africa National Institute for Communicable Diseases
  • US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Zambia National Public Health Institute

Available in four languages:

English  French  Portuguese  Arabic


Africa CDC: Providing a Legal Framework for a National Public Health Institute

Creating a national public health institute (NPHI) usually involves bringing together functions that previously existed in separate organizational units, sometimes with the addition of functions or units that did not previously exist in the national government. Many NPHIs are largely developed from units within Ministries of Health and may not have specific legal language that specifies their functions and authorities. Others have their origin in research institutes, some of which are authorized by laws.

Regardless of the organizations or parts of organizations that comprise the new NPHI, a legal framework that clearly defines what the NPHI will do and how it will operate is an important step to providing the clarity of mission, governance, leadership, and finance that contribute to success.

The purpose of this document – Providing a Legal Framework for an NPHI – is to describe the types of legal mechanisms countries are using to establish NPHIs or enhance the stature of existing NPHIs and the issues typically addressed. It also describes processes countries have used to place NPHIs on sound legal footing, and some of the typical challenges and facilitating factors encountered. It includes detailed descriptions of content that countries might want to include in their legal frameworks and case studies from countries with varied experiences creating NPHIs by decree, law, or regulation.

The creation of this document was a collaborative effort between:

  • Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Emory University School of Law
  • Guinea Bissau National Institute of Public Health
  • International Association of National Public Health Institutes
  • Mozambique Instituto Nacional de Sáude
  • National Public Health Institute of Liberia
  • Nigeria Centre for Disease Control
  • Public Health England
  • South Africa National Institute for Communicable Diseases
  • US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Available in four languages:

English  French  Portuguese  Arabic

Many national public health institutes (NPHIs) were established in the second half of the 20th century. Since they were established, the public health landscape has changed considerably, with new challenges, priorities, structures, technologies, skills, holistic approaches and funding and budget pressures.

Multiple organizations related to public health have often been created in countries according to local needs, to implement different essential public health functions and operations and host specific disciplines. As a result of health system reforms, for efficiency reasons (increase critical mass, better use of budgets or economies) or due to better understanding of the population needs, public health authorities have often considered major reforms or mergers of existing public health organizations, with the purpose of strengthening core activities to provide better focus within health systems and to create more comprehensive NPHIs. Within Europe, several institutes have already gone through this process over the past decade.

This guide developed by the WHO Regional Office for Europe and IANPHI aims to take advantage of the good practices, success factors and strategies of these institutes. The purpose is practical; it is intended to offer an initial source of information for merger initiatives and to raise awareness among decision-makers and key individuals of how complex this is. It also offers a step-by-step action plan for decision-makers and workshop facilitators to successfully prepare and implement the reorganization or merger of their NPHI.

This guide focuses its action points at the level of political decision-makers, health ministries and other key institutes and on their mission and vision: strategic and operational goals; professional development and leadership; project portfolios; validation processes; communication; and legal aspects. Table 1 in the Annex summarizes these actions.

Download the Guide

National public health institutes (NPHIs) sometimes struggle to define the most critical next steps that will improve capacity for core public health functions and effective and efficient internal operations. To fill this gap, U.S. CDC and IANPHI, in consultation with a group of NPHI leaders from around the world, developed the Staged Development Tool (SDT). The tool helps NPHIs assess their current capacity and develop a roadmap for achieving a higher level of functioning.

WHAT IS THE Staged Development Tool?

The SDT uses a maturity model to help NPHIs assess their capacities in priority areas and identify areas for improvement. Thirty Discussion Guides provide detailed descriptions for what might be found at NPHIs at different stages of maturity or development.

The Discussion Guides include both external-facing topics (such as surveillance and research) and internal-facing topics (such as leadership and management). They facilitate conversations that help participants clarify their NPHI’s current state, desired state, and major gaps that need to be addressed to move to their ideal state.

WHO CAN USE THE Staged Development Tool?

The SDT can be used by established NPHIs or during the development of an NPHI if it is clear what groups and which people will comprise the NPHI. The SDT process is designed to be facilitated. We recommend using an external facilitator trained on how to use the tool, especially if the NPHI is using the SDT for the first time.

Learn more

Tapping its unparalleled global expertise, IANPHI developed a unique Peer-to-Peer Evaluation Tool, which is now available to its member institutes interested in an external evaluation. The scope, focus, and terms of the evaluation were developed at the behest of the directors of national public health institutes (NPHIs).

After the 2012 annual meeting in Mexico, IANPHI launched the development of the evaluation tool, based on its experience with the China CDC comprehensive evaluation in August 2010; more targeted evaluations of some essential public health functions or program areas such as non-communicable diseases, tobacco control, and injury that are carried out as part of some IANPHI development projects; and on the experience of the NPHIs with several types of external evaluations.

How to Start an Evaluation

Upon request, IANPHI has the capacity to assemble a team of NPHI directors or senior experts to carry out the external evaluation using different tools developed from the IANPHI Framework for NPHI Development, which set common grounds for definition of the EPHFs and core attributes of NPHIs. The IANPHI evaluation team provides a formal evaluation report with recommendations to the NPHI director.

The Evaluation Tool takes into account the diversity of NPHIs. By pooling and sharing experience, IANPHI has developed principles for the evaluation of an NPHI. The aim is to deliver a tool useful for the NPHI director to demonstrate the contribution of the NPHI in its national specific context, and to draw main recommendations that could provide orientations to improve the quality of their services and impact on public health.

For more information, or to participate in an evaluation exercise, contact us at info@ianphi.org. Funds to cover the costs of such evaluation should be provided by the NPHIs.

Access the Evaluation Tool


Examples of Peer-to-Peer Evaluation Reports

Here is a selection of peer review reports that were made publicly available.

Report from the peer review of RIVM, the Netherlands' NPHI

Report dated April 10-13, 2016

Read the Report


Report from the peer review of Public Health England

Report dated June 26-29, 2017

Read the Report


Report from the peer review of Public Health Wales

Report dated October 9-13, 2017

Read the Report 


Report from the peer review of Santé publique France

Report dated January 28-31, 2019

Read the Report


See also our news report: A team from IANPHI and its member NPHIs conducted a peer-to-peer evaluation in Brussels, Belgium, published in April 2015.

Learn more about this peer-to-peer evaluation experience

Stakeholder engagement is essential for the success of national public health institutes (NPHIs). Because NPHIs have limited time and resources to dedicate to managing stakeholder relationships, it is important for them to focus their investments on those efforts that are likely to be most beneficial.

This guide is an overview of some approaches and tools for internal use by an NPHI or a group that is leading the development of an NPHI from within government. It is not meant to be a comprehensive how-to, but rather to provide ideas about structuring discussions about stakeholders. 

This guide includes:

  • An approach for categorizing stakeholders according to their interest and potential impact on the NPHI 
  • Ideas about ways to engage stakeholders that fall into different interest/potential impact categories 

Available in four languages:

ENGLISH  FRENCH  PORTUGUESE  SPANISH 

See also:

Stakeholder Mapping Grid Template

The Best Practice series provides suggestions for national public health institutes (NPHIs) on a range of topics related to internal-facing issues, such as those related to leadership and management.

For each topic, Best Practices includes a guidance document. Some Best Practices may also include one or more case studies describing the experiences of NPHIs from around the world.

Best Practice: Legal Mandates and Governance for NPHIs

Many countries have established NPHIs to coordinate and lead their public health functions, using different legal and administrative actions and different approaches to governance. Regardless of how an NPHI is constituted, its mandate and its relationship to and degree of autonomy within the Ministry of Health should be explicit.

Read the Best Practice


Legal Mandates and Governance Case Study: Creating the National Public Health Institute of Liberia

In December 2016, Liberia’s legislature passed a bill to establish the National Public Health Institute of Liberia (NPHIL), which President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf signed into law in January 2017.

Read the Case Study


Best Practice: Establishing an NPHI Foundation

Many NPHI directors are recognizing the benefits of establishing independent, nonprofit organizations to pursue partnerships and raise funds from the private sector to support the institute’s mission in ways that might otherwise not be possible or easily achievable.

Read the Best Practice


Establishing an NPHI Foundation Case Study: U.S. Center for Disease Control Foundation

As a government agency, CDC could not take full advantage of potential partnerships with and resources from the private sector that could support its mission. That changed in 1992 when the U.S. Congress authorized the creation of a 501(c)(3) – an independent nonprofit foundation to support CDC. The foundation was incorporated in 1994.

Read the Case Study


Best Practice: Mentorship  

Mentorship is a two-way exchange in which an experienced advisor (mentor) helps a less experienced colleague (mentee) develop professionally, and often personally. Mentorship is increasingly recognized as important to public health capacity building and NPHI workforce development. By creating a culture of mentorship and institutionalizing mentorship programs, NPHIs can provide staff with tools and support to develop their full potential and contribute maximally to the institute ’s development and success.

Read the Best Practice


Mentorship Case Study: IANPHI/Heymann Mentorship Program

The IANPHI Mentorship Program (IMP) was launched in 2009 thanks to a generous donation by Dr. David Heymann. Its goal was to provide current and future NPHI leaders with the tools, training, and support needed to develop their full potential. IMP facilitated mentoring partnerships between established public health experts and colleagues from low- resource NPHIs who showed substantial promise as public health leaders.

Read the Case Study


Mentorship Case Study: Nigerian Institute of Medical Research

In 2003, the Nigerian Institute of Medical Research (NIMR) instituted a mentorship and training program aimed at helping early career staff develop and improve their research. It enlisted senior-level scientists in the professional development of their junior counterparts, with a goal of sustainable development of NIMR’s human and research capacity.

Read the Case Study


Best Practice: Building a Business Case for NPHI Creation 

A business case that provides the rationale for NPHI creation can be a useful resource and advocacy tool. In some cases, development of a business case is required as part of the process of NPHI creation. Using a structured format to lay out the business case helps decision-makers understand the value of creating an NPHI and how the NPHI will result in implementation and coordination of core public health functions. 

Read the Best Practice


Best Practice: NPHI Staff Retention

The ability of NPHIs to conduct public health functions efficiently and effectively depends on having a highly motivated, well-trained, and stable workforce. High staff turnover not only affects the performance of an organization but also is costly.

Read the Best Practice


Best Practice: Recruiting an NPHI Director

Ideally, the director of the NPHI will be a person with the vision, ability, and experience to gain the support of the highest levels of government and mobilize the NPHI’s staff to achieve improved public health in the country. This requires the director to have scientific and public health knowledge and the skills and ability to provide strategic leadership and create trust among government, the public, and NPHI stakeholders.

Read the Best Practice


Best Practice: Peer-to-Peer Visits

Fostering connections among NPHIs is a core tenet of IANPHI’s mission. IANPHI supports these linkages in a number of ways. One strategy is peer-to-peer visits, in which leaders and staff from one NPHI visit each other to share experiences, lessons learned, and wisdom about building or strengthening NPHIs.

Read the Best Practice


Peer-to-Peer Visit Case Study: Pakistan National Institute of Health

In 2017, the Pakistan National Institute of Health (NIH) visited the Netherlands’ National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) as an early step in planning for a stronger NIH. RIVM was extremely supportive, both because of its interest in expanding its global health efforts and its desire to support IANPHI and its members.

Read the Case Study

Each national public health institute (NPHI) is different and develops in a unique way. To understand the factors that supported the successful creation and growth of our member NPHIs, IANPHI talked to the leaders of several institutes to understand how their NPHIs had been created – why are NPHIs formed, key ingredients to their successes, and barriers to greater impact.

This series of case studies reveal the stories of the NPHIs and provide insights into the process of NPHI development that we hope will be useful to others. 

NPHI Creation Stories

Integration of Tiered Networks within Public Health Institutes: The Ethiopian Public Health Institute (EPHI) Experience

In the last decade, Ethiopia has achieved numerous public health successes, among them early attainment of health-related Millennium Development Goals, strong tuberculosis (TB) management program, and progress toward eradication of Guinea worm disease.

Read the Case Study


Ethiopia Public Health Institute (EPHI)

In 2013, EPHI was created from one primary precursor organization, the Ethiopian Health and Nutrition Research Institute (EHNRI), but is the final result of nearly 90 years of evolving public health institute arrangements in Ethiopia. 

Read the Case Study


Institut Pasteur du Maroc

In Morocco, NPHI functions are dispersed among three agencies. Professor Mohammed Hassar describes his vision for consolidating into a single institute and the potential benefits and challenges associated with such a consolidation.

Read the Case Study


National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD), South Africa

In 2002, a government restructuring provided an opportunity to create an NPHI in South Africa. Professor Barry describes the critical factors in ensuring the success of a new agency.

Read the Case Study


Public Health Agency of Canada

In 2003, outbreaks of acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) resulted in a public health crisis in Canada and led to the creation of a new NPHI. Dr. David Butler-Jones provides his perspectives on issues and lessons learned in developing an NPHI.

Read the Case Study


U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

From its roots as an agency fighting malaria, U.S. CDC has become one of the largest and most influential public health institutions in the world. Dr. David Sencer describes the growth of U.S. CDC and some of its challenges.

Read the Case Study


Best Practice Case Studies

LEGAL MANDATES AND GOVERNANCE CASE STUDY: CREATING THE NATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE OF LIBERIA 

In December 2016, Liberia’s legislature passed a bill to establish the National Public Health Institute of Liberia (NPHIL), which President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf signed into law in January 2017.

Read the Case Study


Establishing an NPHI Foundation Case Study: U.S. Center for Disease Control Foundation

As a government agency, CDC could not take full advantage of potential partnerships with and resources from the private sector that could support its mission. That changed in 1992 when the U.S. Congress authorized the creation of a 501(c)(3) – an independent nonprofit foundation to support CDC. The foundation was incorporated in 1994.

Read the Case Study


MENTORSHIP CASE STUDY: IANPHI/HEYMANN MENTORSHIP PROGRAM

The IANPHI Mentorship Program (IMP) was launched in 2009 thanks to a generous donation by Dr. David Heymann. Its goal was to provide current and future NPHI leaders with the tools, training, and support needed to develop their full potential. IMP facilitated mentoring partnerships between established public health experts and colleagues from low- resource NPHIs who showed substantial promise as public health leaders. 

Read the Case Study


MENTORSHIP CASE STUDY: NIGERIAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH

In 2003, the Nigerian Institute of Medical Research (NIMR) instituted a mentorship and training program aimed at helping early career staff develop and improve their research. It enlisted senior-level scientists in the professional development of their junior counterparts, with a goal of sustainable development of NIMR’s human and research capacity.

Read the Case Study


Peer-to-Peer Visit Case Study: Pakistan National Institute of Health

In 2017, the Pakistan National Institute of Health (NIH) visited the Netherlands’ National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) as an early step in planning for a stronger NIH. RIVM was extremely supportive, both because of its interest in expanding its global health efforts and its desire to support IANPHI and its members.

Read the Case Study


Case studies from the Africa CDC guidance on Providing a Legal Framework to an NPHI

Nigeria CDC

The NCDC was established in 2011 to improve Nigeria’s preparedness to handle public health challenges and to optimize the use of public health resources. The value of having an NPHI was demonstrated during the 2014 response to the Ebola outbreaks. In 2017, a legal framework for NCDC was passed by the national legislature. It was signed by President Buhari in 2018. Because Nigeria is so large and populous, a decision was made to create a parastatal organization, which would be more nimble than a line agency within the Ministry of Health.

Read the Case Study


National Institute of Health of Mozambique

The National Institute of Health of Mozambique (INS) was established in 1976 as a division within the Preventive Medicine Directorate of the Ministry of Health (MoH). In 1983, the INS became a distinct institution within the MoH, with limited autonomy. This changed in 2017, with the passage of Decree 57/2017.

Read the Case Study


National Public Health Institute of Liberia

The National Public Health Institute of Liberia (NPHIL) was officially established by the NPHI Act of 2016, which was signed into law by the President in January 2017. This law was passed quickly, to address the weaknesses in public health observed during Liberia’s response to the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak. The process used to develop the law and its content and garner support is described in the IANPHI “Case Study: Creating the National Public Health Institute of Liberia”.

Read the Case Study


Guinea Bissau's National Public Health Institue

Guinea Bissau’s National Public Health Institute (INASA) was formally established on August 26, 2010. The creation of INASA was the culmination of over a decade of effort that had been interrupted by war and political shifts.

Read the Case Study


You can read the full Africa CDC guidance on Providing a Legal Framework to an NPHI.

How to Structure Key Messages for a Given Public Health Topic

These guidelines were developed for a media relations training workshop held in 2019 in Abuja for the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control. They are applicable for all national public health institutes on any public health issue.

  1. Communications objective: What are we trying to achieve with the information in this document?
  2. Authorized spokespersons: Names, titles, email, contact information of everyone who is assigned to communicate with the media or public about an issue.
  3. Background: Explain the issue (ex. a summary of the outbreak, its geographic scope, how many people are impacted) in a paragraph or two.
  4. Communications risks: What are the risks of communicating on this topic with the media? Also, what are the risks of NOT communicating on this topic? 
  5. Posture: Decide if your objective is best-served by communicating proactively, or by waiting to react to a media inquiry? 
  6. Reminder of Standard Operating Procedure for this particular issue: Write out the decision making process for creating, approving and updating these talking points, including names and contact for relevant leadership and technical experts.
  7. Talking Points: What are the key messages we want to convey, in order of importance? Radio and television news stories are typically very short, so it's essential that you deliver your most important messages first, clearly and often.
  8. Questions and Answers: The same information as above, but presented in Q&A format.
  9. Message House: The message house is a graphical format for organizing and memorizing key messages. It's a very helpful tool for paring down a large amount of information into priority items. Forcing yourself to organize messages into the message house format will help you choose and deliver the most important messages to deliver during time-constrained interviews.
  10. What questions do we fear being asked? Imagine the most difficult interview situation - the questions you dread being asked - and try to prepare for them.
  11. Responsibility: Who is responsible for keeping the technical information in this document up-to-date?

Quick Guide to Driving COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance

Based on the discussions of the IANPHI Communications Discussion Group meeting of June 9, 2021 
  1. Trust is a prerequisite: establish the public’s trust in your institute before building vaccine confidence.
  2. Target your communications efforts towards subsets of the population that can realistically be convinced to receive the vaccine.
  3. Take the time to understand why people are hesitant to get vaccinated and address their specific concerns in your messaging and do not assume preconceived notions about reasons for vaccine hesitancy are correct.
  4. Be critical about which hesitant viewpoints you choose to address with the public. Ensure a viewpoints’ reach is widespread and addressing it will not bring undue attention.
  5. Favor honest and open conversations with the public.
  6. Create consistent, insight-driven messaging using multiple platforms to reach your audiences (website, TV, radio, social media, health hotlines, Q&As, scientific briefings, etc.)
  7. Establish a constant and open channel with local news organizations to feed them your messaging.
  8. Leverage community stakeholders to understand the social perception of messaging and to act as influencers to champion vaccination in their communities.
  9. For younger age groups, emphasize how the vaccine will change community restrictions and how some consequences of COVID-19 are just as likely to affect young persons as older persons (such as “long COVID”).
  10. Assess the impact of your strategies: monitor surveillance data, vaccination data, and corresponding changes in behavior; look for gaps; practice social listening; conduct surveys and KAP studies; keep re-assessing regularly.

Additional IANPHI Resources

IANPHI COVID-19 Resource Hub

To assist IANPHI members, partners, and other public health professionals, IANPHI created a list of publicly available resources, links and documents related to the COVID-19 response, as well as a list of publicly available web pages and documents detailing responses of our member organizations. 

Go to the COVID-19 Resource Hub

IANPHI COVID-19 Webinar Series

IANPHI has made available resources from the IANPHI-hosted webinars featuring IANPHI members' senior public health leaders sharing their experience responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Learn More About the IANPHI COVID-19 Webinar Series

The IANPHI Strategy 2021-2025 was developed in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the need for global collaboration and collective action had never been more apparent. The strategy signals the next phase of IANPHI’s strategic development. All countries have been challenged by the pandemic. National public health institutes (NPHIs) are and will continue to be a major part of the solution to building future health security and fairer societies and strengthening public health action.

Our priority is to champion the development of NPHIs where they are most needed, supporting the creation of institutes where they do not yet exist, and targeting support at low-income countries and in low-resourced settings where the need to maximize the impact of limited health resources is paramount and where effective public health action will maximize health gain and reduce inequalities. This goal will be achieved through the further strengthening of the robust network of institute directors and an active program of public health capacity development.

Download the IANPHI Strategy 2021-2025

IANPHI Progress Report 2020

IANPHI's 2020 Progress Report emphasizes our mission, achievements and impact in a particularly challenging year for member national public health institutes (NPHIs) marked by the COVID-19 pandemic. This report features our updated tool kit for NPHIs, our contribution to the COVID-19 response, highlights of the 2020 IANPHI Annual Meeting and of the country projects we are supporting, as well as a selection of our best stories from 2020.

View the Progress Report


Former Progress Reports

IANPHI Statutes

As per its statutes, IANPHI is constituted and incorporated as an international non-profit association, in accordance with the Belgian law of 27 June 1921 (Title III). Its registered office is in Belgium.

Read the Full Statutes 

Read the Certified Statutes (French)  

IANPHI Internal Rules

IANPHI Internal Rules cover IANPHI's members, governing bodies, secretariat, foundation and partners.

Read the Internal Rules  

IANPHI Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct

IANPHI is an advocate for global collaboration in promoting health in all policies, respecting human and environmental rights, social equity, universal access to health services and ethics in knowledge production. The organization recognizes that a strong ethical principles statement and code of conduct demonstrates the commitment of the organization and its members to the mission of IANPHI.

Read the Code of Conduct

The IANPHI Annual Meetings provide opportunities for NPHI directors to share experiences and expertise, discuss common issues, and plan for future collaborations. In addition to robust scientific benchmarking and technical sessions, these meetings are a rich setting for developing professional and institutional linkages.

Virtual 2020 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2020 IANPHI Annual Meeting was held virtually on December 1-2, 2020, hosted by the Brazilian national public health institute, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz)

Learn more about the 2020 Meeting


2019 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2019 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Ethiopian Public Health Institute and the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 

Read the Meeting Highlights


Read the 2019 Meeting Presentations 


Read the Executive Board's Conclusions 



2018 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2018 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by Public Health England in London, United Kingdom.

Read the Meeting Highlights


2017 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2017 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità in Rome, Italy. 

Read the Meeting Highlights


2016 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2016 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Shanghai, China. 

See the Meeting Agenda 


2015 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2015 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Institute for Public Health and Surveillance (InVS) in Paris, France.

Read the Meeting Highlights


2014 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2014 IANPHI Annual Meeting was co-hosted by Morocco's National Institute of Hygiene and Pasteur Institute of Morocco.

Read the Meeting Highlights 


2013 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2013 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Tanzania's National Institute for Medical Research

Read the Meeting Highlights 


2012 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2012 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by Mexico's Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

Read the Meeting Highlights 


2011 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2011 IANPHI Annual Meeting was held in Helsinki, Finland.

Read the Meeting Highlights


2010 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2010 IANPHI Annual Meeting was held in Atlanta, USA.

Read the Meeting Highlights


2009 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2009 IANPHI Annual Meeting was held in Johannesburg, South Africa.


2008 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2008 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) in Bilthoven, Netherland.


2007 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The 2007 IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Beijing, China.


2006 IANPHI Annual Meeting

The first IANPHI Annual Meeting was hosted by the Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz), the Brazilian national public health institute, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Saving Lives Through National Public Health Institutes 

Created to support IANPHI's efforts to encourage the development of national public health institutes (NPHIs), this fact sheet answers these questions:

  • What are NPHI's and why are they important?
  • Who are the leaders of IANPHI? How is IANPHI helping countries create or strengthen NPHIs?
  • How can you create an NPHI in your country?

Download the Fact Sheet

Tools and Resources for IANPHI Members 

IANPHI has developed tools and resources to help members strengthen the effectiveness of their efforts. Some of the major tools and resources are listed in this fact sheet. IANPHI also assists NPHIs through technical assistance, training, and providing access to a collegial and interconnected community of NPHIs.

Download the Fact Sheet

Global Health Resources

The International Health Regulations, or IHR (2005), represent an agreement between 196 countries including all Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO) to work together for global health security.

Through IHR, countries have agreed to build their capacities to detect, assess and report public health events. WHO plays the coordinating role in IHR and, together with its partners, helps countries to build capacities.

IHR also includes specific measures at ports, airports and ground crossings to limit the spread of health risks to neighboring countries, and to prevent unwarranted travel and trade restrictions so that traffic and trade disruption is kept to a minimum.

English (PDF) Arabic (PDF) Chinese (PDF)

French (PDF) Russian (PDF) Spanish (PDF)

Learn more about IHR (2005)

The Sustainable Development Goals are the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. They address the global challenges we face, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate change, environmental degradation, peace and justice. The 17 Goals are all interconnected, and in order to leave no one behind, it is important to achieve them all by 2030. 

Goal 3 addresses good health and well-being. Ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being at all ages is essential to sustainable development. 

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, major progress was made in improving the health of millions of people. Significant strides were made in increasing life expectancy and reducing some of the common killers associated with child and maternal mortality. But more efforts are needed to fully eradicate a wide range of diseases and address many different persistent and emerging health issues. By focusing on providing more efficient funding of health systems, improved sanitation and hygiene, and increased access to physicians, significant progress can be made in helping to save the lives of millions.

Health emergencies such as COVID-19 pose a global risk and have shown the critical need for preparedness. The pandemic provides a watershed moment for health emergency preparedness and for investment in critical 21st century public services. 

Learn more about the Sustainable Development Goals

Learn more about Goal 3

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (Sendai Framework) was the first major agreement of the post-2015 development agenda and provides United Nations Member States with concrete actions to protect development gains from the risk of disaster.

The Sendai Framework works hand in hand with the other 2030 Agenda agreements, including the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development, the New Urban Agenda, and ultimately the Sustainable Development Goals.

It was endorsed by the UN General Assembly following the 2015 Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR), and advocates for:

The substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses in lives, livelihoods and health and in the economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assets of persons, businesses, communities and countries.

It recognizes that the State has the primary role to reduce disaster risk but that responsibility should be shared with other stakeholders including local government, the private sector and other stakeholders.

English (PDF) Arabic (PDF) Chinese (PDF)

French (PDF) Russian (PDF) Spanish (PDF)

Learn more about the Sendai Framework