Upcoming Webinar
Steal These 5 AI Grant Workflows, From Prospecting to Spend-Down.
Thu, Sep 17 @ 2PM ET
Why Instrumentl
Full Cycle Grant Platform
By Customer
Featured
$1.1m More Per Year
The Instrumentl Impact Report
Explore
Learn
Connect
Find the perfect Financial Assistance Grants in Indiana on Instrumentl. 10,000+ Financial Assistance Grants in Indiana in the United States.
10,000+
Available grants
$2.71B
Total funding
$5K
Median grant
Skip the search. Get matched with grants that fit your non-profit.
Smart recommendations based on your profile — in minutes.
Multiplex Platforms to Assess Indicators of Micronutrient Status, Inflammation and Infectious Disease
The Challenge
Although combined immunological measurement of several micronutrient biomarkers has been demonstrated, current methods still have important limitations. These include heterogeneity in the composition of standards and controls; inconsistent batch-to-batch performance of analyte-binding molecules; variable reactivity for some analytes, especially soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR); and a functional analytical range that is too narrow to cover the physiological values of some analytes, such as CRP. It would also be valuable to add bioindicators for vitamins B1, B2, B9 and B12, which may require binding molecules that recognize metabolites or proteins associated with deficiency, a specific vitamer (plasma methyl-tetrahydrofolate without reacting with folic acid), comparable reactivity across vitamers (several folate forms in red blood cells), or a specific carrier-protein form (holo-transcobalamin rather than apo-transcobalamin or haptocorrin for vitamin B12).
The improved assays must combine high analytical specificity, sensitivity and robustness with a functional analytical range matched to the physiological values expected in the target populations (women of reproductive age, including during pregnancy and lactation, preschool-age children and older adults). Assays must remain low-cost (no more than US$20 for all analytes measured in duplicate) and require very small sample volumes, preferably less than 10 µL of plasma or serum). The tests are intended for population surveillance rather than local clinical (point-of-care) use. They should be designed to run many samples in a single batch in a small number of national or regional reference laboratories. The goal is to reduce dependence on expensive, infrequent population surveys and on export of samples to specialized laboratories in high-income settings.
This challenge is structured around two alternatives, a minimum-scope approach and an optimistic-scope approach. Targets are aligned with the candidate Target Product Profile for this platform, and applicants will be held to the relevant performance, cost and instrument targets.
Multiplex Platforms to Assess Indicators of Micronutrient Status, Inflammation and Infectious Disease
The Challenge
Although combined immunological measurement of several micronutrient biomarkers has been demonstrated, current methods still have important limitations. These include heterogeneity in the composition of standards and controls; inconsistent batch-to-batch performance of analyte-binding molecules; variable reactivity for some analytes, especially soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR); and a functional analytical range that is too narrow to cover the physiological values of some analytes, such as CRP. It would also be valuable to add bioindicators for vitamins B1, B2, B9 and B12, which may require binding molecules that recognize metabolites or proteins associated with deficiency, a specific vitamer (plasma methyl-tetrahydrofolate without reacting with folic acid), comparable reactivity across vitamers (several folate forms in red blood cells), or a specific carrier-protein form (holo-transcobalamin rather than apo-transcobalamin or haptocorrin for vitamin B12).
The improved assays must combine high analytical specificity, sensitivity and robustness with a functional analytical range matched to the physiological values expected in the target populations (women of reproductive age, including during pregnancy and lactation, preschool-age children and older adults). Assays must remain low-cost (no more than US$20 for all analytes measured in duplicate) and require very small sample volumes, preferably less than 10 µL of plasma or serum). The tests are intended for population surveillance rather than local clinical (point-of-care) use. They should be designed to run many samples in a single batch in a small number of national or regional reference laboratories. The goal is to reduce dependence on expensive, infrequent population surveys and on export of samples to specialized laboratories in high-income settings.
This challenge is structured around two alternatives, a minimum-scope approach and an optimistic-scope approach. Targets are aligned with the candidate Target Product Profile for this platform, and applicants will be held to the relevant performance, cost and instrument targets.
Looking for financial assistance grants in Indiana?
Read more about each grant below or start your 14-day free trial to see all financial assistance grants in Indiana recommended for your specific programs.
How common are grants in this category?
Common — grants in this category appear regularly across funding sources.
Over the past year, when are grant deadlines typically due for Financial Assistance grants in Indiana?
Most grants are due in the second quarter.
What's the typical amount funded for Indiana?
Grants are most commonly $158,271.
What's the total number of grants in Financial Assistance Grants in Indiana year over year?
In 2024, funders in Indiana awarded a total of 42,920 grants.
Among all the Financial Assistance Grants in Indiana given out in Indiana, the most popular focus areas that receive funding are Education, Philanthropy, Voluntarism & Grantmaking Foundations, and Human Services.
1. Education
2. Philanthropy, Voluntarism & Grantmaking Foundations
3. Human Services
How is funding for Financial Assistance Grants in Indiana changing over time?
Funding has increased by 35.58%.
How does grant funding vary by county?
Marion County, Monroe County, and Tippecanoe County receive the most funding.
| County | Total Grant Funding in 2024 |
|---|---|
| Marion County | $5,951,081,269 |
| Monroe County | $587,464,361 |
| Tippecanoe County | $370,158,455 |
| St Joseph County | $332,109,828 |
| Allen County | $235,684,076 |