Scaling adoption of synthesis screening outside the US and EU
Project Details
Updated 07/20/26 · Edited by orgThis is a critical time for adoption of effective synthesis screening tools. New mandates for enhanced screening under the US framework come online in October 2026; California AB1864, if it passes, will introduce new requirements in January 2027; and the EU Biotech Act will also likely introduce screening requirements in early 2027. This funding will help IBBIS to accelerate adoption of screening in medium-to-large businesses based in international markets that sell to the US and EU, that other screening tools have limited access to (e.g. in China, India, South Korea and Brazil). This is because compared to other tools, IBBIS maintains a free, open-source screening tool, resources for customer screening, and has already established connections to key organisations and individuals based in these countries, as well as other tool providers such as SecureDNA and Aclid. Our tool is already in use by providers in China, the US, and EU, but building on the momentum from recent software performance updates, IBBIS is ready for a larger outreach campaign to accelerate adoption during this regulatory window.
Theory of Impact
Updated 07/20/26 · By grantmaking.aiA recent field strategy guide for synthesis screening identified voluntary adoption of screening as one of the key initiatives to secure the DNA supply chain, which it also identified as the most critical chokepoint for engineering a pandemic-capable pathogen, a capability that is currently diffusing into more hands as AIs become significantly more bio-capable. Voluntary adoption of screening helps to pave the way for regulatory incentives and mandates for screening, and helps to preserve the strategic ambiguity necessary for effective deterrences.
Quoting the guide, "if providers screen even in countries without mandates (as they do today), a bad actor can’t safely assume any given provider won’t screen." If synthesis screening will be effective at preventing engineered pandemics, it needs to be significantly more widely-adopted than it is at present. The goal is by 2030 >80% of companies conduct high-quality screening, with modelling funded by Sentinel Bio suggesting this threshold would significantly reduce engineered pandemic risk by raising barriers for non-state actors. Coverage of China and India, identified by IBBIS’s Global Synthesis Map as the countries with the second- and fourth-largest number of custom synthesis companies, is necessary to reach that threshold.
People
Updated 07/20/26 · By grantmaking.aiTeam Member
Discussion
I endorsed this grant proposal because:
- Biosecurity is the highest risk near-term AI threat vector and non-existential biorisks could significantly weaken civilisational resilience ahead of AGI (like COVID arguably did). There are less than 100 people working full time on worst-case biosecurity.
- Screening mail-order DNA seems like a no-brainer. This needs to be funded yesterday! Even if US companies adopt screening practises, overseas companies might not, which could have worldwide consequences.
- I know Tessa and she comes highly recommended through backchannel references. She has good background experience in biosec and bio research. IBBIS seems impressive.
I recommend funding this the maximum $50k.
Great!
@Tessa Alexanian, some logistics:
- Did you receive funding from anywhere since submitting this application, or has the funding ask changed for any other reason?
- Please confirm your commitment to post quarterly updates on how the project is going
- IBBIS hasn't received additional funding to support this work. Since I wrote this, we've received a small amount of funding for other projects, all under grants that were already signed before this application was submitted. In terms of the funding ask changing, I didn't include any overhead or travel budget in the "ideal" ask here, and colleagues have suggested I might be wise do that, but I don't think that has an impact on the base ask.
- I am happy to make IBBIS responsible for quarterly updates, and I can post them; they're likely to be drafted by this hire rather than me, but I assume that's okay?
@Tessa Alexanian Thanks. Regaring updates: yes this works, what matters is that someone representing the org commits to sharing progress updates at least quarterly
@Anton Makiievskyi 🔸 Great, yeah, happy to make that commitment!
I was about to recommend funding this. Then I realized @Ryan Kidd already did. Seems great.
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.