Engaging in the Health Promoting School approach

📜🔗LINK to the source

1. ANALYTICAL SUMMARY

A coordination framework, not just another system

The School Promoter of Health approach (EPSa), initiated from January 2020 as a continuation of the health education pathway (law of 8 July 2013, law of 26 January 2016), does not create a new programme. It aims to articulate and make clear what already exists — school climate, education on nutrition, education on emotional and relational life, prevention of risky behaviours — by integrating it into the school or establishment project. It is based on the WHO definition of health (1946) and the One Health concept. The target audience is all students, from nursery to high school, with an explicit aim of reducing social health inequalities, which manifest from childhood (vademecum, p. 6). The underlying issue is dispersion: isolated actions, uncoordinated, without shared diagnosis or evaluation.

Ready-to-use tools, from diagnosis to labelling

The corpus provides operational equipment that is directly transposable: an infographic showing the distribution of roles among five functions (drive/manage, design/conduct, provide individual support, engage/collaborate, welcome and preserve spaces); three tool sheets to be presented in instances, corresponding to the three stages engage / deepen / sustain (vademecum, p. 37-39); a model intervention charter in the school environment (p. 35-36); the criteria for the Édusanté label at three levels (p. 30-32). This is supplemented by the support of a multi-category academic team of 4 to 6 people whose contact details are downloadable, Magistère training pathways, and a quarterly newsletter (n° 17, T1 2026). The point of vigilance regarding sectarian drifts is addressed substantively (p. 29).

2. KEY POINTS OF THE DOCUMENT

1. The health education pathway structures the approach around three inseparable axes — education (development of psychosocial skills linked to programmes and the common core), prevention (targeted actions on priority issues, including risky behaviours), protection (favourable environment for health and well-being). This triad “educate / prevent / protect” is the guiding framework for all EPSa actions (web page, section “The educational health pathway”; vademecum, p. 6).

2. EPSa is not a new model but an operation for coherence. The vademecum is explicit: “it is not about building a new model, but about making visible, bringing together and coordinating” (p. 2). In practical terms: forming a project team, establishing a concerted diagnosis, conducting an inventory of existing actions, making them visible, involving parents and students in the bodies, training the teams (levers listed p. 12).

3. The distribution of roles is formalised into five functions. The infographic “Who does what” distinguishes: initiating and leading (inspection bodies, management staff, administrative assistants); designing and conducting projects (school directors, teachers, school life); providing individual support (social service assistants, nurses, doctors, psychologists); getting involved and collaborating (students, health ambassador students, parents); welcoming the educational community and preserving living spaces (territorial technical staff). Details by profession from page 13 of the vademecum.

4. The point of vigilance “sectarian drifts” is explicit and enforceable. Miviludes notes a significant increase in reports, of which 40% fall within the field of health. The alerts concern proposals made to teachers and students which, under the guise of innovation or well-being, mask attempts at infiltration. The text establishes an individual responsibility: not to promote “unproven” methods of care or well-being, and to alert the IEN (primary level) or the head of establishment (secondary level) even in case of simple doubt (web page, section “The partners of the School”; vademecum, p. 29). The use of speakers from approved or contracted associations is to be preferred.

5. The Édusanté labelling formalises a progression in three levels. Commitment (diagnosis of needs, presentation in school council or CESCE, choice of partners); deepening (training of staff, internal coordination of all health-related activities, emergence of a common culture, initial valorisation actions); deployment (global modification of functioning, sustainability strategy). Optional and voluntary approach, instructed in academic committee (vademecum, p. 30-32). The models of forms to be presented in instances are on p. 37-39.

3. ACTION PATHWAYS FOR LOCAL ACTORS

1. Start from the existing diagnosis, not a blank page. The first prescribed step is to rely on the establishment or territory diagnosis, then to list the actions already carried out before engaging in new ones (web page, section “The instances to mobilise”). Use the tool sheet “Step 1: Engage the approach” (vademecum, p. 37), structured in three columns — diagnosis / objectives / actions — with the headings “who does what”, “timing”, “with whom”, “means”.

2. Pass the project through the instance that inscribes it in the long term. School council in the primary sector; health, citizenship and environment education committee (CESCE, including inter-level or inter-establishment), college life council, high school life council in the secondary sector. The transition to instance is not formal: it conditions registration in the school or establishment project, thus the survival of the project beyond one person.

3. Formalise any external intervention with a charter before the first session. The model is downloadable in .doc format and is included in the annex of the vademecum (p. 35-36). It sets: prior authorisation, registration in the establishment project, co-construction of the content based on a needs analysis, mandatory co-facilitation with staff from the national education system, free of charge, non-profit, absence of proselytism and of a moralising or guilt-inducing stance, evaluation planned from the preparation stage. An intervention is never limited to a one-off piece of information: prior work and follow-up actions are required.

4. Check the accreditation before engaging a partner, and know how to alert. Consult the list of associations accredited by the national education system. In case of doubt about a "well-being" practice, personal development or unconventional therapy: alert the IEN or the head of establishment, and inform the academic correspondent responsible for preventing sectarian phenomena (web page; vademecum, p. 29).

5. Mobilise existing academic and territorial support rather than rebuilding. Each academy has a multi-category EPSa steering team (4 to 6 people: IA-IPR EVS, IA-IPR disciplinary, management staff, technical advisors nurse/doctor/social service, IEN-ET, IEN first degree), whose contact details can be downloaded from the page. It connects with the CAESCE, UNIRéS, the INSPÉ, and supports the training of student health ambassadors in connection with regional health promotion bodies.

6. Involve students as actors, avoiding automatic designation. The sheet "Becoming a health ambassador" specifies the method of designation, training, and missions. The vademecum recommends 2 to 4 students volunteers per level (p. 18) and recalls an important evaluation result: peer prevention is more effective when recruitment by mandatory designation is avoided (p. 18, note 31). Possible missions: participate in the diagnosis (questionnaires among peers), propose themes, contribute to reflection on school spaces.

Identified unmet needs: no deployment indicator is published (number of engaged or labelled schools, academic coverage rate); the corpus does not provide a standardized impact evaluation tool, leaving each team to build its own indicators.

External speakers: the point of vigilance not to be overlooked

What the ministry says

Miviludes notes a significant increase in reports of sectarian deviations. The health sector accounts for 40%. At School, alerts concern proposals made to teachers and students that, under the guise of innovation or well-being, conceal attempts at infiltration by sectarian movements.

The text establishes individual responsibility, not just institutional: it is up to every member of the national education system not to promote "unproven" methods of care or well-being.

What to do — 5 reflexes

1. Check before welcoming. Prioritise speakers from conventioned or approved associations by the national education system (national or academic level). The list of approved associations is public and available online.

2. Have the charter signed. A model intervention charter is downloadable (also in the appendix of the vademecum, p. 35-36). It sets the accepted framework for all: free of charge, non-profit, absence of proselytism, prohibition of any moralising or guilt-inducing stance, evaluation planned from the preparation stage.

3. Never allow an intervention to take place alone. The co-facilitation with a member of the national education system is the rule, not an option. It is the first filter against non-compliant content.

4. Alert at the slightest doubt — doubt is sufficient. The text is explicit: alert the IEN in the first degree, the head of establishment in the second, "even in case of simple doubt or questioning". This is not an accusation, it is a procedure.

5. Pass to the academic correspondent. In case of suspicion of a risk of sectarian drift, inform the academic correspondent responsible for the prevention of sectarian phenomena in schools.

The criterion to retain

The question is not "is this person sincere?" but "has this method proven its effectiveness, and does the intervenor belong to an accredited structure?". Disagreement is addressed on the grounds of evidence and accreditation, never on that of intention.

Sources: éduscol, "Engaging in the Health Promoting School approach", March 2026; Vademecum The Health Promoting School, p. 29 and p. 35-36; circular no. 2012-051 of 22 March 2012.

4. ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

🔍➕ For more information, see the articles referenced by "Health Practices" on the theme Health Promoting School ➡️🔗 https://www.pratiquesensante.com/blog/tag/ecole-promotrice-en-sante-513

1. IGÉSR — Psychosocial skills: a requirement to support the emancipatory promise of the republican School, report no. 24-25-108B, October 2025 (published in March 2026). Essential critical complement: it notes that the integration of PS skills in schools remains marginal, identifies the resistance of staff, and names two risks that the vademecum does not address — therapeutic drift (the School is not meant to replace health professionals) and the normalisation of behaviours. 🔗 https://www.education.gouv.fr/igesr/competences-psychosociales-soutenir-la-promesse-emancipatrice-de-l-ecole-republicaine-470036

2. Public Health France — Psychosocial skills: an operational framework for expert professionals and PS trainers, volume 1, 2025 (volume 2 in 2026). Update the 2022 reference cited in the vademecum; break down each CPS operationally, with training kit, sheets and self-assessment grid for the quality of interventions. 🔗 https://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/les-actualites/competences-psychosociales-un-referentiel-operationnel-destine-aux-formateurs-experts

3. Ministry of National Education — Circular of 4 February 2025 regarding the implementation of education for emotional and relational life (EVAR) and sexuality (EVARS), BO No. 6 of 6 February 2025 (programme set by order of 3 February 2025, in effect from the start of the 2025 school year). Subsequent to the vademecum, it explicitly articulates EVARS, health education pathway, CPS and EPSa management, and provides for the annual inclusion of the subject on the CESCE agenda. 🔗 https://www.education.gouv.fr/bo/2025/Hebdo6/MENE2503565C

5. FAQ

1. Is it necessary to create a new project to enter the EPSa approach?

No. The approach explicitly aims to enhance and articulate actions already implemented, not to add a new system. The first step is an assessment of the existing situation based on the establishment or territory diagnosis (web page, sections "Understanding the approach" and "The bodies to mobilise"; vademecum, p. 2 and p. 12).

2. Who decides on the commitment to the approach?

It goes through the bodies: school council in the primary sector, CESCE in the secondary sector (including inter-level or inter-establishment), with the involvement of parent and student representatives. The management staff or the school principal is the pilot; inclusion in the school or establishment project ensures its sustainability (web page; vademecum, p. 13 and p. 21-22).

3. How to supervise an external associative intervention?

Prioritise associations approved or contracted by the national education system. Have the intervention charter signed (downloadable .doc template, also in the appendix of the vademecum p. 35-36). Every intervention is validated by the IEN or the head of the establishment, prepared in advance with the educational team, and takes place in co-animation with staff from the national education system (vademecum, p. 29 and p. 35).

4. What to do in response to a dubious ‘well-being’ or personal development proposal?

Do not promote it. Miviludes reports that 40% of reports of sectarian drift fall within the health sector. The instruction is to alert the IEN (1st degree) or the head of the establishment (2nd degree) even in case of simple doubt, and to inform the academic correspondent responsible for preventing sectarian phenomena (web page, section ‘Point of vigilance’; vademecum, p. 29).

5. What is the concrete purpose of the Édusanté label?

It values existing initiatives, structures action transversally, facilitates networking with partners, and embeds the approach in a duration that ‘resists changes’ (in other words: team changes). Three levels: commitment, deepening, deployment. Optional approach, instructed in the academic committee (sheet ‘Becoming an Édusanté labelled school’; vademecum, p. 30-32).

6. What exact role can students play?

Two forms: the daily involvement of all students through the strengthening of CPS in and out of the classroom; and the engagement of volunteer students as health ambassadors (2 to 4 per level) — participation in the diagnosis, proposal of actions, peer awareness, reflection on school spaces. Volunteering is not a detail: the evaluation shows that peer prevention loses effectiveness when recruitment is done by mandatory designation (vademecum, p. 17-18).

7. Where to find support if the team lacks method?

From the academic steering team EPSa (contact details downloadable on the page). Training: Magistère pathway (hygiene and health cycles 2-3; health education primary level; practices of school nurses; CPS and educational health pathway), UNIRéS training, methodological support from regional health promotion bodies, resources from IFÉ and Public Health France (web page, section "Training in the approach").

6. REWRITING IN EASY TO READ LANGUAGE

What is a Health Promoting School?

A Health Promoting School is a way of working.

It brings together all actions for the health of students.

It does not create a new project.

It organizes what already exists.

The school acts on three things:

• Educate : teaching students to take care of themselves and others.
• Prevent : acting before health problems arise.
• Protect : making the school pleasant and safe.

A student who is well learns better.

That is the starting idea.

Who does what?

Everyone participates.

• The directors and heads of establishment launch the project.
• Teachers carry out actions with the students.
• Nurses, doctors, psychologists and social workers help each student.
• Students give their opinions. Some become health ambassadors.
• Parents also participate.
• The maintenance and catering staff take care of the living spaces.

Important points

1. We start by looking at what exists.

We make a list of actions already taken in the school.

We look at the needs of the students.

2. We discuss it in a meeting.

In schools: the school council.

In colleges and high schools: the CESCE.

The CESCE is a meeting on health and citizenship.

3. We write the project in the school project.

This way, the project continues even if someone leaves.

4. Be careful of people coming from outside.

Some people propose 'well-being' methods.

These methods are not always serious.

They can be dangerous.

You must choose associations authorised by the National Education.

In case of doubt, you must inform the headteacher or the school principal.

5. The school can receive a label.

The label is called Édusanté.

It shows that the school is doing well for health.

There are three levels. We progress step by step.

The label is not mandatory.

Tools to use

• A form to prepare the project.
• A charter to be signed by external stakeholders.
• A graphic that explains who does what.
• A team in each academy that can help.
• Online training.

7. CROSS-ANALYSIS — VALUES OF HEALTH PRACTICES

Literacy: the handbook explicitly states the strengthening of health literacy among the objectives of the ‘educate’ axis (p. 6), but the corpus itself does not offer any easy-to-read version or adaptation for specific needs audiences.

Empowerment: the student is positioned “both as a target and as an actor,” with the aim of making them aware of their capacity to act (p. 17); the health ambassador system translates this intention into an identified function.

Participation: co-construction is formalised — development of projects “in consultation” within dedicated bodies, participation of students in the diagnosis through questionnaires, involvement of elected parents; the charter requires that any external action is part of a participatory approach.

Community health: the collective dimension is structuring (territorial approach, local health contracts, local mental health councils, educational cities, educational success programmes), but the entry remains institutional: residents and families are partners, not co-decision-makers.

Ethics: the framework is clear on three points — prohibition of proselytism and any moralising or guilt-inducing attitude (charter, p. 36), rejection of unproven methods (p. 29), free of charge and non-profit nature of interventions.

Human rights : equity, inclusion, non-discrimination and social justice are among the fundamental values of the approach (p. 10) ; article L. 111-1 of the education code is cited in support.

Intersectorality : strongly developed — ARS, MILDECA, local authorities, SDIS, police/gendarmerie, youth houses, youth welcome and listening points, local missions, consultations for young consumers, CIDFF, family planning, regional health promotion bodies (p. 25-28).

Partnership : a model of collaboration is genuinely formalised (standard charter + hierarchical validation + mandatory co-facilitation + evaluation planned from the preparation), which is rare in this type of document.

Fight against discrimination : the charter commits all participants to respect the individual “without social, cultural, ethnic, gender or religious affiliation discrimination”; gender equality and the prevention of harassment are among the cross-cutting educational themes that can be mobilised. Non-judgment is framed negatively (prohibition of guilt-inducing posture) rather than as a skill to be developed.

8. EVALUATION OF THE RELIABILITY OF THE RESOURCE

Scientific relevance — solid on the framework, dated on the data.

Institutional primary source (DGESCO), under open licence Etalab. The legal foundations are verifiable and accurate (law of 8 July 2013; law of 26 January 2016; articles L. 121-4-1 and L. 541-1 of the education code; circulars 2016-008, 2015-117, 2011-216; interministerial health committee of 26 March 2018). The vademecum is sourced (WHO, Ottawa Charter, HBSC, ENCLASS, DePICT, Public Health France evaluations of the Unplugged programmes, TABADO, ASSIST, Good Behavior Game).

⚠️ Limits and reports :

• Generational gap between the page (March 2026) and the vademecum (2020). The vademecum still refers to CESC, whereas the page uses CESCE (committee integrating the environment). It refers to outdated frameworks: MILDECA plan 2018-2022, city contracts 2015-2022, training master plan 2019-2022, disappeared CGET site. Several URLs cited in the PDF notes are obsolete.
• Internal tension on dating. The page indicates a process "initiated as of January 2020", whereas the interministerial health committee of 26 March 2018 is presented as the text that "defines the Health Promoting School approach". These are two distinct moments (definition / deployment) not explained.
• The Miviludes figure (40% of reports in the health field) is cited without a report year or link to the source. It is plausible and consistent with Miviludes activity reports, but not verifiable in its current state from the document.
• No deployment data. The number of schools and institutions engaged or labelled Édusanté is not communicated, which prevents any assessment of the actual scope of the approach since 2020.
• The corpus does not yet include the major publications of 2025. Neither the IGÉSR report of October 2025 (which takes a critical look at the CPS framework and warns of the risks of therapeutic drift and normalisation), nor the operational CPS framework from Santé publique France (2025) are mentioned in the vademecum or on the page.
• Document of a prescriptive and institutional nature : it presents a desired framework, without counterpoint on the documented obstacles (shortage of school health personnel, available time of teams, inequalities in resources between academies).

Operational relevance — high.

The standard charter, the three tool sheets per step, the labelling grid, and the infographic of role distribution are directly usable without adaptation. The contact details of the academic teams are downloadable. This is the main value of the document.

10. STRATEGIC HASHTAGS

#healthpractices #HealthPromotingSchool #HealthPromotion #SchoolHealth #PsychosocialSkills #YouthPrevention #SectarianDrifts #HealthLiteracy