Background:Themajor goal of incontinence treatment is to reduce symptomburden and ensure that patients’ resources are as helpful as possible. This goal requires standardized assessment that will represent the typical spectrum of functioning problems, and positive or negative influencing factors of patients with urinary (UI) or fecal incontinence (FI). There is need for a validated short, simple instrument to quantify the burden and impact of UI and FI to aid complex health status assessment in the sense of the biospsychosocial model of theWorldHealthOrganisation (WHO)using the standardized description of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) of the WHO. Purpose: The aim of the present study is to identify problems and resources of UI and FI in the context of the ICF and the biopsychosocial model of the WHO. The project aims to: 1. Identify problems and resources, 2. assess the impact of UI and FI on health status and 3. plan and evaluate interventions. Methods: Systematic analysis of level-A disease-specific questionnaires recommended by the ICS was done. Overall, 437 questions from 27 questionnaires were translated (“linked”) with the most precise of the 1400 ICF categories using standardised rules, by two experienced researchers (ICIQ-FLUTS, ICIQ-VS, P-QOL, IIQ, ISS, PRAFAB-Q, UISS, B-SAQ, QUID, UDI, ICIQ-MLUTS, DAN-PSS1, ICSQoL, I-QOL, Urolife, ICIQ-UI SF, ICIQ-LUTSquol, LUSQ, OAB-SS, UU Scale, PPBC, IUSS, ICIQ-Nquol, ICIQ-B, FI QL, Assessment Osterberg, BBUS-Q). Statistics with bootstrapped confidence intervals were used to describe the agreement between the researches who performed the linking. Results: Links were found in 110 ICF categories; however, only 13 reached an agreement more than 25.0%. Forty-nine categories were linked to the component Body functions. The component Body structures was represented by 8 categories. Forty-three categories of the component Activities and participation and 10 categories of the component Environmental factors were linked. No resources could be identified in those questionnaires. The Kappa statistic for the agreement between the researchers who performed the linkingwas 0.42with a 95%bootstrapped confidence interval of 0.41 to 0.42 (moderate agreement). Conclusion(s): There was a surprisingly high number of linked categories, but 61 categories were covered by only 1 or 2 questionnaires, 97 of 110 with less agreement than 25.0%. Furthermore, a 3-round Delphi technique survey with experienced German-speaking physiotherapists is ongoing. The patients’ perspective will be reported by focus groups and personal interviews. A formal consensus process will follow to establish the first version of the ICF-IAF. Furthermore, international validation using the Delphi process incorporating all relevant health professionals is to be investigated. Implications: Current level-A recommended questionnaires cover small spectrums of the burden of UI and FI, as well as no resources. The ICF-IAF will be a short, simple questionnaire for assessing and monitoring problems and resources of patients with UI and FI. Translation of the ICF-IAF will enable world-wide use and should help to standardise therapy and research protocols.