Search the GHTC website

Global health R&D delivers for Michigan

US government investment in global health R&D has delivered

$208 million
to Michigan research institutions
2,800+ new jobs
for Michigan
Michigan's top USG-funded global health R&D institutions

Michigan's top USG-funded global health R&D institutions

University of Michigan
$74.4 million
Michigan State University
$58.7 million
Health Decisions Inc.
$27.3 million
Kelly Services Inc.
$16.2 million
$7 million
Wayne State University
$5.6 million
Ash Stevens Inc.*
$3.6 million
Van Andel Institute
$2.6 million
University of Central Michigan
$2.3 million
nanoRETE Inc.*
$1.1 million
Michigan Technological University
$967 thousand
Western Michigan University
$725 thousand
Iaso Therapeutics
$619 thousand
$563 thousand
$533 thousand
Advanced Sensor Technologies Inc.*
$494 thousand
Optofluidic Bioassay
$256 thousand
Henry Ford Health System
$226 thousand
Alluvium Biosciences*
$217 thousand
$4 thousand

Michigan's top areas of global health R&D by USG funding

Diarrheal diseases
Neglected tropical diseases
Buruli ulcer
Helminth infections (Worms & Flukes)
Kinetoplastid diseases
Reproductive health
Bacterial pneumonia & meningitis
Emergent non-polio enteroviruses (including EV71, D68)
Multi-disease/health area R&D
Other coronaviruses (including MERS, SARS)
Salmonella infections
Global health R&D at work in Michigan

Michigan State University (MSU) researchers have developed a low-cost test that uses nanoparticles to diagnose tuberculosis (TB). Currently, the two most common approaches for diagnosing TB globally are smear microscopy—using a microscope to examine a sample—and automated PCR testing machines. The former requires skilled health workers and often results in misdiagnosis, while the latter is accurate but remains expensive for many low- and middle-income countries to implement. The MSU approach uses magnetic nanoparticles and stain, which are mixed with a patient’s sputum sample and exposed to a magnet, resulting in either a clustering pattern or dispersal of the nanoparticles that designates the diagnosis. The test is about 30 times cheaper than PCR testing, requires minimal training, and all supplies can be stored at room temperature—making it a promising technology for use in low-resource communities worldwide.

  • Methodology
  • US government global health R&D investment (total to state, top funded institutions, top health areas): Authors’ analysis of USG investment data from the G-FINDER survey following identification of state location of funding recipients. Reflects funding for basic research and product development for neglected diseases from 2007 to 2022, for emerging infectious diseases from 2014–2022, and sexual and reproductive health issues from 2018 to 2022. Funding to US government agencies reflects self-funding and/or transfers from other agencies. Some industry data is anonymized and aggregated. See methodology for additional details.
  • *Organization appears to be closed/out of business.
  • Jobs created: Based on author’s analysis described above and previous analysis assessing jobs created per state from US National Institutes of Health funding. See methodology for additional details.
  • Neglected and emerging diseases: Reflects US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data for: Chikungunya virus cases 2014–2022, Dengue virus infection cases 2010-2021, HIV diagnoses 2008–2022, Malaria cases 2007–2022, Mpox cases 2022–March 29, 2023, Tuberculosis cases 2007–2021, Viral hemorrhagic fever cases 2007-2022, and Zika virus disease cases 2015–2021.
  • Case study photo: NIH/FIC/David Rochkind