PERSONAL 

FIREARMS

Programs that 

Promote Safe Storage 

and Research on 

Their Effectiveness

Report to Congressional Requesters

September 2017

GAO-17-665

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-17-665, a report to 

congressional requesters

September 2017

PERSONAL FIREARMS

Programs that Promote Safe Storage and Research 

on Their Effectiveness

What GAO Found

GAO identified 16 public or nonprofit programs that promote the safe storage of 

firearms on the national and local levels. These programs primarily involved 

education efforts through media campaigns and partnerships in the community. 

For example, the Bulletproof Kids program provides safe storage information to 

parents and assists pediatricians in discussing firearm safety with patients. (See 

figure.) Additionally, the New Hampshire Firearm Safety Coalition created 

partnerships among diverse perspectives to further a common goal of preventing 

firearm injuries and deaths through safe storage. This partnership helped the 

Coalition distribute suicide-prevention materials in gun shops statewide. In 

addition to education, four of the programs that GAO identified distributed free 

safe storage devices to gun owners. For example, the National Shooting Sports 

Foundation’s “Project ChildSafe” has distributed 37 million free safety kits that 

include a firearm locking device, across the United States. 

Bulletproof Kids Campaign Material Promoting the Need to Safely Store Firearms Away from 

Children

Program officials and researchers indicated that safe storage, as with other gun 

safety issues, has not been extensively studied. They cited a federal 

appropriations restriction on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 

(CDC) use of funds to advocate or promote gun control as one explanation. GAO 

identified 12 studies that evaluated locking device distribution or physician 

counseling programs from GAO’s literature review, as well as from discussions 

with researchers. These studies found that free lock distribution efforts 

influenced behavior to store firearms more safely, but these results were largely 

based on self-reports. Studies evaluating physician consultation presented mixed 

results. Some found that counseling in pediatric primary care visits did not 

change parents’ storage behavior, but emergency care consultation following an 

adolescent psychiatric crisis did prompt parents to store firearms safely. In 

addition to these studies, GAO found that, of the 16 safe storage programs it 

identified, three evaluated aspects of their programs’ effectiveness. The other 13

programs had not evaluated their effectiveness, but some provided data on the 

distribution of locking devices or educational materials.

View GAO-17-665. For more information, 

contact Marcia Crosse at (202) 512-7114 or 

crossem@gao.gov.

Why GAO Did This Study

According to data from CDC, an 

agency within the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS), 

among children under age 18, there 

were over 6,900 nonfatal firearm 

injuries seen in U.S. emergency 

departments and nearly 1,500 firearmrelated deaths in 2015. CDC data also 

indicate that, across all ages, suicide 

accounted for about 61 percent of all 

firearm-related deaths in 2015. While 

safe firearm storage practices—such 

as keeping guns secured with a cable 

lock, or in a gun safe—reduce the risk 

of firearm injuries, estimates indicate 

that over one-quarter of household 

firearms are stored loaded and half of 

these are not kept locked. 

GAO was asked to identify programs 

related to gun access and provide 

information on the effect of such 

programs. This report addresses (1) 

what is known about public and 

nonprofit programs that promote the 

safe storage of personal firearms at the 

national and local levels, and (2) the 

extent to which safe storage programs 

have been studied and the results of 

the research. 

GAO interviewed officials at HHS and 

the Departments of Interior, Justice 

(DOJ), and Veterans Affairs (VA). GAO 

conducted a literature review related to 

safe firearm storage and interviewed 

researchers that it selected based on 

its firearm safety research and 

representatives of organizations 

sponsoring safe storage programs. 

GAO provided a draft of this report to 

HHS, Interior, DOJ, and VA. Interior, 

DOJ, and VA did not provide 

comments. HHS provided technical 

comments which GAO incorporated as 

appropriate.
Page i GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Letter 1

Background 5

National and Local Safe Firearm Storage Programs Largely 

Focused on Education, with Some Distributing Locking Devices 12

While Research and Evaluations of Programs Are Limited, Some 

Studies Suggest Lock Distribution May Encourage Safer 

Firearm Storage 20

Agency Comments 31

Appendix I Organizations Contacted 35

Appendix II Firearm Safety Technologies 37

Appendix III Federal Efforts to Promote Firearm Safety 40

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 43

Bibliography 44

Tables

Table 1: Federal Grants Related to Firearm Safety that GAO 

Identified 40

Table 2: Federal Programs for Firearm Safety 42

Figures

Figure 1: Age-adjusted Rates of Firearm-Related Deaths and 

Non-fatal Injuries in the United States, 1990 through 2015 6

Figure 2: Firearm-related Deaths in the United States by Manner 

of Death, 2015 7

Figure 3: Age-adjusted Rates of Firearm-related Suicides in the 

United States, 1999 through 2015 8

Contents
Page ii GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Figure 4: Rates of Firearm-related Deaths and Suicides in 

Children, Under Age 18, in the United States, 1999 

through 2015 9

Figure 5: Examples of Firearm Locking Devices 11

Figure 6: Images from Various Safe Firearm Storage Campaign 

Materials 15

Figure 7: Image from a Trigger Lock and Lock box Distribution 

Event Sponsored by Seattle Children’s Hospital 19

Abbreviations

ATF Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

BJA Bureau of Justice Assistance

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

Interior Department of Interior

DOJ Department of Justice

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

FWS Fish & Wildlife Service

HHS Department of Health and Human Services 

NIH National Institutes of Health

NIJ National Institute of Justice

NRA National Rifle Association

NSSF National Shooting Sports Foundation

RFID radio frequency identification 

VA Department of Veterans Affairs

VHA Veterans Health Administration

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

September 19, 2017

Congressional Requesters

Over 100 organizations representing health care providers consider the 

number of firearm injuries and related deaths that occur each day to be a 

serious public health epidemic. Researchers have found that having a 

firearm in the home is a risk factor for injuries and deaths, including 

suicides, among adults and children alike.1 While household firearms can 

pose a danger to anyone, the inherent curiosity of children makes them 

particularly susceptible to harm from an unsecured firearm.2 According to 

the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

(CDC), there were approximately 85,000 individuals seen in emergency 

departments in the United States for firearm-related injuries in 2015, with 

children under the age of 18 accounting for 6,900 of these injuries.3 CDC 

data also indicate that there were more than 36,000 firearm-related 

deaths in 2015, almost 1,500 of which involved children. In addition, 

nearly two-thirds of all firearm-related deaths in 2015 were suicides. 

 1

For example, see D. J. Wiebe, “Homicide and Suicide Risks Associated with Firearms in 

the Home: A National Case-Control Study,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, vol. 41, no. 6 

(2003).

2

Diverse organizations agree that children’s curiosity about firearms can be dangerous. 

See 

http://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/Childre

n-And-Firearms-037.aspx; http://www.projectchildsafe.org/safety/safe-storage; 

http://www.seattlechildrens.org/safety-wellness/guns-in-the-home/, all accessed on June 

26, 2017.

3

In this report, we define “children” as individuals under age 18. Estimates of firearmrelated injuries and deaths are from CDC’s Web-based Injury Statistics Query and 

Reporting System. These estimates are from 2015, which is the most recent year such 

data are available.

Letter
Page 2 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Several surveys and studies have reported estimates that firearms are 

present in 32 to 39 percent of households in the United States.4

Many organizations agree that firearms should be properly stored to 

prevent access by unauthorized users. For example, the American 

Academy of Pediatrics and the National Shooting Sports Foundation 

(NSSF) both recommend that firearms be stored unloaded, locked, and 

separate from locked ammunition. According to some studies, gun 

owners who practice safe storage are less likely to incur firearm-related 

injury or death by accidental and self-inflicted means.5 Yet, one study 

estimated that over one-quarter of household guns are stored loaded, and 

half of these are not kept locked.6

You asked us to identify public and nonprofit programs that raise 

awareness about firearm access and storage practices and provide 

information on the effectiveness of such programs. This report addresses:

1) what is known about public and nonprofit programs that promote the 

safe storage of personal firearms at the national and local levels; and

2) the extent to which safe storage programs have been studied and the 

results of the research.

To examine what is known about programs that promote safe storage of 

personal firearms at the national and local levels, we interviewed officials 

 4

We identified estimates of households with firearms from nationally representative 

surveys conducted by the Gallup Poll, the General Social Survey, and Pew Research 

Center. The Gallup Poll estimated that 39 percent of respondents reported a firearm in the 

home in 2016, while the General Social Survey and Pew Research Center found that 32 

percent and 33 percent of respondents, respectively, reported household firearms. These 

survey estimates are similar to estimates in some of the studies we identified. For 

example, one study, estimated that nationally, 32.6 percent of adults reported that 

firearms were kept in or around their home. See Okoro, C. A., et al., “Prevalence of 

Household Firearms and Firearm-Storage Practices in the 50 States and the District of 

Columbia: Findings from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2002,” 

Pediatrics, vol. 116, no. 3 (September 2005).

5

Shenassa, E. D., et al., “Safer Storage of Firearms at Home and Risk of Suicide: A Study 

of Protective Factors in a Nationally Representative Sample,” Journal of Epidemiological 

Community Health, vol. 58 (2004). 

Rowhani-Rahbar, A., Simonetti, J. A., and Rivara, F. P., “Effectiveness of Interventions to 

Promote Safe Firearm Storage,” Epidemiologic Reviews, vol. 38 (2016).

6

Miller, M. “One Third of Households in the USA Own Firearms which Are Often Stored 

Unsafely,” Evidence-Based Healthcare & Public Health, vol. 9 (2005).
Page 3 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

at four federal agencies that support programs or research related to the 

safe storage of firearms and firearm safety, as well as agencies that 

collect data related to firearm injuries and deaths.7 Specifically, we 

interviewed officials from the Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS), the Department of the Interior (Interior), the Department of Justice 

(DOJ), and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Within HHS, we 

interviewed officials at CDC and analyzed data on nonfatal firearm 

injuries and firearm deaths, including firearm-related suicides from its 

Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System. This reporting 

system is an interactive database that provides fatal and nonfatal injury, 

violent death, and cost of injury data from a variety of sources.8 While 

data from this system have known limitations, it is the federal 

government’s leading source for death and injury data.9 We assessed the 

reliability of this data by interviewing CDC officials about their systems, 

and reviewing literature that assessed the quality of the data, and found it 

reliable for our purposes. In addition, we interviewed officials at the 

National Institutes of Health (NIH). We also interviewed researchers, 

experts in the field of firearm safety, and representatives from 22 

organizations that either conduct research or have programs related to 

safe firearm storage, including nonprofit organizations, academic 

institutions, and a county government. We selected these organizations 

based on our research of firearm safety programs as well as referrals 

from experts in the field. These organizations reflect diverse perspectives, 

including public health concerns and firearm ownership rights. (See app. I 

for a list of the organizations that we contacted.) In addition to interviews, 

we reviewed these organizations’ websites and documentation, such as 

educational materials, related to their efforts to promote safe storage.

 7

In this report, we focus on the safe storage of personal firearms. We excluded the 

storage of service firearms, such as those used by law enforcement officers and military 

forces, from our review.

8

The Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System collects data from sources 

such as the National Vital Statistics System and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance 

System, All Injury Program. 

9

Recognized limitations of data on deaths from the Web-based Injury Statistics Query and 

Reporting System include the possibility for misclassification of the intent of the death. 

Data on individuals with non-fatal firearm injuries are also limited in that they do not 

directly record all injuries, but are derived from a nationally representative sample of 66 

hospitals in the United States. The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, All 

Injury Program, which is the source of the injury data that we reviewed, first started 

providing a full year of data in 2001. Thus, earlier data are not available.
Page 4 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

To examine the extent to which safe storage programs have been studied 

and the results of the research, we asked the officials from the 22 

organizations that we interviewed about their efforts, if any, to evaluate 

their respective programs. We also conducted a literature review to 

determine what is known about the effectiveness of different types of 

programs that promote the safe storage of personal firearms. To identify 

existing studies, we searched reports from government agencies, medical 

associations, and research organizations, as well as trade publications 

and peer-reviewed journals. Using search terms that included the words 

“firearm,” “gun,” and “storage,” we searched various social science 

databases, such as Scopus, ProQuest, and Social SciSearch, which 

provide access to abstracts and citations of peer-reviewed literature.10 We 

also searched Policy File Index, which offers access to foreign and 

domestic policy papers and gray literature, as well as OCLC’s Worldcat, 

which is a worldwide library catalog.11 We did not limit our searches by 

publication date, but excluded literature that provided safe storage 

examples outside the United States. We performed these searches from 

June 2016 to November 2016 and identified 120 studies. Most of these 

studies were descriptive studies that related to firearm prevalence, as 

opposed to safe firearm storage. To further refine our focus on 

evaluations of safe storage approaches and to assess the methodological 

quality of the selected studies, we examined summary level information 

about each piece of literature, and identified studies that were germane to 

such evaluations. We then examined the methodologies of identified 

studies and determined that the studies were sufficiently reliable for the 

purposes of our report, and then summarized the research findings. As a 

result, we identified eight studies through our literature review that met 

 10Scopus is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature, 

scientific journals, books and conference proceedings. ProQuest is the common name of 

a group of databases that provide scholarly journals, newspapers, reports, working 

papers, and datasets along with digitized historical primary sources and over 450,000 

ebooks. The Social SciSearch database is an international, multidisciplinary index to the 

literature of the social, behavioral, and related sciences. 

11Policy File Index allows access to reports from over 350 public policy think tanks, 

nongovernmental organizations, research institutes, university centers, advocacy groups, 

and other entities from 1990 – current. Gray literature is the general name for non-formally 

published scholarly literature or substantive information that is produced by researchers 

and practitioners in particular fields of study. Gray literature is produced by government 

agencies, universities, corporations, research centers, associations and societies, and 

professional organizations. OCLC stands for “Online Computer Library Center, Inc.,” 

which is a global library cooperative that provides shared technology services, original 

research and community programs for its membership and the library community at large.
Page 5 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

our criteria for relevance and methodological quality.12 We supplemented 

this list with eight additional studies that also met our criteria. We 

identified these additional studies through our discussions with federal 

officials and researchers, or from citations included in studies we obtained 

through the literature review, but which were not directly identified through 

the literature review itself.

We conducted this performance audit from May 2016 to September 2017 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

According to research, following safe firearm storage practices—such as 

keeping guns unloaded and locked with ammunition locked separately—

reduces the likelihood of injuries and deaths by preventing unauthorized 

adults and children from accessing or using the firearm.13 Some studies 

have found that adherence to safe storage principles can decrease the 

number of suicides, particularly those committed impulsively, as well as 

unintentional shootings involving children.14 However, it is unclear how 

many of these injuries and deaths—which represent a portion of all 

firearm injuries and deaths—could actually be prevented through the use 

of safe storage practices.

Various organizations have raised different perspectives on what 

constitutes safe firearm storage depending on factors such as an 

individual’s personal circumstances, purpose for having the firearm, and 

when they consider it to be “in-use.” For example, some gun owners who 

keep a firearm for personal or home defense may consider it in use at all 

 12We included studies that evaluated the effectiveness of programs related to storage of 

personal firearms and excluded studies that related to firearms used for law enforcement 

and the military.

13See Shenassa, E. D., “Safer Storage of Firearms at Home and Risk of Suicide: A Study 

of Protective Factors in a Nationally Representative Sample,” and Rowhani-Rahbar, A., 

“Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Safe Firearm Storage.” 

14D. C. Grossman et al., “Gun Storage Practices and Risk of Youth Suicide and 

Unintentional Firearm Injuries,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 293, no. 

6 (2005); Shenassa, “Safer Storage of Firearms at Home and Risk of Suicide.”

Background
Page 6 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

times. Thus, from this perspective having the firearm unloaded and 

locked affects its availability for immediate protection. In contrast, other 

gun owners may keep a firearm for a discrete activity and therefore may 

have distinctly defined periods of when it is in use, such as, when owners 

are hunting.

Firearm-related deaths are currently among the top five causes of death 

for individuals under the age of 65 in the United States.15 According to 

CDC data, overall firearm-related death rates decreased from 1993 to 

2000, but have remained relatively stable since then. Data on individuals 

who sustained nonfatal firearm-related injuries show that from 2001 to 

2015, the rates for these injuries were approximately twice the rates of 

firearm-related deaths. (See fig. 1.)

Figure 1: Age-adjusted Rates of Firearm-Related Deaths and Non-fatal Injuries in the United States, 1990 through 2015

Note: Data on age-adjusted rates of firearm-related deaths and non-fatal firearm-related injuries 

treated in U.S. emergency departments were obtained from CDC’s Web-based Injury Statistics Query 

 15CDC reports that these firearm deaths and injuries are estimated to result in over $48 

billion in medical and work loss costs each year. See Fowler, K.A., Dahlberg, L.L., 

Haileyesus, T., Annest, J.L., “Firearm Injuries in the United States” Preventive Medicine,

vol. 79 (2015).
Page 7 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

and Reporting System. The injury data are from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, 

All Injury Program, which first started providing a full year of data in 2001. Thus, injury data before 

this date are not available. Additionally, the injury data are derived from a nationally representative 

sample of 66 hospitals in the U.S.

CDC data also indicate that most of the firearm-related deaths were due 

to suicide. Of the 36,252 firearm-related deaths in 2015, about 61 percent 

(22,018) were suicides. (See fig. 2.)

Figure 2: Firearm-related Deaths in the United States by Manner of Death, 2015

Note: Data on firearm-related deaths were obtained from CDC’s Web-based Injury Statistics Query 

and Reporting System.

Firearms are also the most commonly used means in suicides, and were 

used in approximately half of all suicides in 2015. CDC data also indicate 

that firearm-related suicide rates decreased from 1990 to 2006, but then 

increased every year since then to 2015.

16 (See fig. 3.)

 16Research that examined the accuracy of classifications of unintentional deaths in the 

National Violent Death Reporting System and the Vital Statistics System from 2003 to 

2006 found that firearm-related suicides may be underreported due to misclassification of 

the cause of these deaths. See Barber, C. Hemenway, D., “Too Many or Too Few 

Unintentional Firearm Deaths in Official U.S. Mortality Data?” Accident Analysis and 

Prevention, vol. 43, issue 3 (May 2011).
Page 8 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Figure 3: Age-adjusted Rates of Firearm-related Suicides in the United States, 1999 through 2015

Note: Data on age-adjusted rates of firearm-related suicides were obtained from CDC’s Web-based 

Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System. 

For children under the age of 18, CDC data indicates that in 2015, there 

were 1,458 total firearm-related deaths for children—with nearly 40 

percent (566) of them due to suicide.

17 The rate of child suicides by 

firearm showed a downward trend from 1999 to 2007, but then an upward 

trend since then. (See fig. 4.)

 17CDC’s suicide data are based on children aged 10 to 17. According to CDC, suicide is 

rare in children under the age of 10—its data identified 6 cases nationally from 1999 to 

2015. CDC officials also pointed out that experts in the field have determined that children 

under 10 years may not be developmentally capable of forming suicidal intent. 

Additionally, in 2015, over 6,900 children were seen in U.S. emergency departments for 

nonfatal firearm injuries.
Page 9 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Figure 4: Rates of Firearm-related Deaths and Suicides in Children, Under Age 18, in the United States, 1999 through 2015

Note: Data on firearm-related death and suicide rates were obtained from CDC’s Web-based Injury 

Statistics Query and Reporting System. Firearm suicide rates are based on children aged 10 to 17 

years. Apart from suicide being rare in children under the age of 10, experts in the field use this age 

as a lower boundary since children under 10 years may not be developmentally capable of fully 

forming suicidal intent.

Some research that examined storage practices in homes found that 

many households keep firearms loaded and unlocked. For example, one 

study that assessed firearm storage patterns across the country in 2002, 

found that although household firearms were less likely to be stored 

loaded or loaded and unlocked in homes with children, approximately 

1.69 million children were living in homes with loaded and unlocked 

firearms.18 A second study that reviewed articles published between 1992 

and 2002, similarly found that firearms in households with children were 

stored slightly more securely than households without children.19

However, it also found that over 25 percent of households kept firearms 

 18See Okoro, C. A., et al., “Prevalence of Household Firearms and Firearm-Storage 

Practices in the 50 States and the District of Columbia: Findings From the Behavioral Risk 

Factor Surveillance System, 2002,” Pediatrics, vol. 116, no. 3, (September 2005). 

19Miller, M. “One Third of Households in the USA Own Firearms.”
Page 10 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

loaded, and only half of these loaded firearms were kept locked. A third 

study found that approximately 1.4 million homes, with about 2.6 million 

children, did not store firearms safely based on a 1994 survey—

approximately 1 million higher than the first study because it also included 

firearms that were stored unloaded, but unlocked with ammunition.20

While these studies include estimates from 15 years ago, they provide the 

most recent storage data that we identified and insight on past storage 

practices. Since that time, it is estimated that the number of firearms in 

households has increased, but we did not identify more recent estimates 

of safe storage practices.21

There are a variety of locking devices that can be used to store or disable 

firearms.22 The devices vary in cost and design. For example, some 

devices are placed on the firearm to prevent pulling of the trigger, thus 

disabling it, while others prevent access to the firearm entirely by storing it 

in a locked container. (See fig. 5.)

 20See Schuster, M., et al., “Firearm Storage Patterns in US Homes with Children,” 

American Journal of Public Health, vol. 90, no. 4, April 2000.

21A more recent study estimates that from 1994 to 2015, the number of firearms owned by 

civilians has grown by 70 million firearms, to approximately 270 million. See Azrael D., 

Hepburn L., Hemenway D., Miller M., “The Stock and Flow of US Firearms: Results from 

the 2015 National Firearms Survey,” The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social 

Sciences. Forthcoming.

22In addition to devices that can be used to disable or secure a firearm, some 

organizations recommend removing firearms from the home, either permanently or 

temporarily, as another approach to preventing unauthorized access to them. 
Page 11 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Figure 5: Examples of Firearm Locking Devices

Related to the safe storage of firearms is the development of gun safety 

technologies, sometimes referred to as “smart guns” or “personalized 

guns,” which are intended to prevent unauthorized users from accessing 

or discharging a firearm. Although some of the officials we spoke with 

indicated that such firearms are not a substitute for storing a firearm 

safely, some researchers believe that these technologies may in the 

future help to reduce the number of firearm suicides and other firearm-
Page 12 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

related deaths. For more information on these technologies, including 

initiatives to encourage their development, see app. II.

We identified a variety of programs that support the safe storage of 

personal firearms. Some were national campaigns, while others were 

organized at the local level. Most of these programs focused on educating 

the general adult population, although some were directed at physicians 

on how to counsel parents of their pediatric patients about firearm safety 

and storage. In addition to educating, some of these programs distributed 

locking devices, such as cable locks.

Of the four federal agencies and 22 organizations that we contacted, we 

identified 16 with programs that promote the safe storage of firearms.23

Some of these efforts were national campaigns promoting messages 

about storing firearms safely and some were developed with support from 

a federal agency.24 For example, the National Crime Prevention Council, 

which is a nonprofit organization, created the “Lock It Up” campaign to 

disseminate public service announcements through the Internet, 

television, radio, and billboards.25 The “Be SMART” campaign—

developed by the nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety—similarly uses the 

Internet to distribute its materials, but it also partners with national 

organizations, such as the Parent Teacher Association, to reach parents 

 23Some of the 22 organizations that we contacted—such as the Joyce Foundation/Fund 

for a Safer Future—did not have a safe storage program, but fund research related to safe 

storage and firearm safety. Other organizations were academic institutions that similarly 

did not have a safe storage program, but conducted research in this field. See app. I for a 

list of the organizations that we contacted. 

24Federal efforts through DOJ and HHS to promote safe firearm storage primarily consist 

of funding nonprofit organizations to implement programs, while the VA administers its 

own safe storage campaign. See app. III for a list of other federal efforts related to firearm 

safety. 

25The National Crime Prevention Council created the “Lock-It-Up” campaign in conjunction 

with the Bureau of Justice Assistance within DOJ and the Ad Council, a private, nonprofit 

organization that develops campaigns and public service announcements for other 

nonprofit organizations or federal government agencies. This campaign was developed in 

response to a directive contained in the January 2013 White House policy document 

entitled: Now Is the Time: The President’s Plan to Protect Our Children and Our 

Communities by Reducing Gun Violence.

National and Local 

Safe Firearm Storage 

Programs Largely 

Focused on 

Education, with Some 

Distributing Locking 

Devices

Safe Storage Programs 

Varied From National 

Campaigns to Local, 

Community Efforts
Page 13 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

of school-aged children. NSSF, which administers a program called 

“Project ChildSafe,” established partnerships throughout the country to 

distribute its firearm safety materials in all 50 states and five U.S. 

territories. Even though the “Lock It Up” and “Be SMART” campaigns are 

nationally focused, officials at both organizations said the campaigns 

have local aspects to further distribute their messages at a grassroots 

level. For example, an official at the National Crime Prevention Council 

indicated that as part of its campaign’s media efforts, it participates in 

interviews with local radio stations. Officials at Everytown for Gun Safety 

told us that they distribute their materials at community events and meet 

with local officials, such as law enforcement. According to these officials, 

their efforts to meet with a police chief in a New Jersey county resulted in 

the police department agreeing to distribute “Be SMART” materials with 

every gun permit issued.

Other safe storage campaigns and programs that we identified focused 

their efforts at the local level. For example, King County, Washington 

created the “Lok-It-Up” campaign to educate and promote safety in its 

communities. Included in this campaign’s materials is a listing of retailers 

in Washington where residents can purchase a locking device and 

receive a discount when mentioning the campaign. The campaign’s 

website also informs residents that gun safes and lock boxes are taxexempt in Washington. Similarly, the Arizona Firearm Injury Prevention 

Coalition has a local focus that concentrates on preventing firearm 

injuries and deaths by providing education to local organizations and 

health providers, such as the Arizona Chapter of the American Academy 

of Pediatrics and the Phoenix Children’s Hospital. An official from 

“Bulletproof Kids” said that the program also promotes safe storage 

locally by providing posters and brochures to physicians’ offices and by 

putting up billboards along busy streets. This program’s website includes 

videos with local partners, such as a police chief, to further its message of 

the importance of storing a firearm safely.

Each of the 16 programs that we identified developed and disseminated 

safe storage educational materials that teach the importance of safely 

storing a firearm. Program materials generally recommended that 

firearms be stored unloaded, locked, and separate from locked 

ammunition and provided information on different locking devices—such 

as a cable lock, lock box, or gun safe—that can be used to secure a 

firearm. Materials often included information, such as images of locking 

devices and, in some cases, the cost of these devices. They also target 

information to specific populations that may be particularly affected by an 

Safe Storage Programs 

Focused on Educational 

Efforts; Some Distributed 

Locking Devices
Page 14 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

unsecured firearm, like children, and individuals at risk of suicide. For 

example,

• The National Crime Prevention Council’s “Lock It Up” campaign and 

Everytown for Gun Safety’s “Be SMART” campaign include messages 

about how parents try to protect their children from household 

hazards, such as medicines or swimming pools, and that a household 

firearm should be considered similarly hazardous and therefore 

should be secured as well.

• The “Be SMART” and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence’s 

“Asking Saves Kids (ASK)” campaign also educate parents on the 

need to ask about whether other homes that their children may visit 

have unsecured firearms.

• VA also has educational materials geared to its population. For 

example, literature and a video developed for the Veterans Crisis Line 

offer a reminder that, while veterans may be well versed in firearm 

safety, their families may not be. As such, VA recommends that 

household firearms be locked and kept secure during chaotic, 

stressful times, such as when someone is impaired by drugs or 

alcohol or a family member is depressed or feeling hopeless.

• “Suicide-Proof Your Home,” developed by a partnership between the 

Rhode Island Department of Health and the Brady Center, educates 

parents about steps they can take to reduce the risk that a youth 

suicide will occur in their home. To do so, parents are counseled to 

securely lock or remove lethal means, such as firearms, from the 

home. Related to youth suicide, the “Bulletproof Kids” materials 

include statistics on the number of youth suicides and injuries related 

to firearms to convey the impact of an unsecured firearm in the state. 

(See fig. 6.)
Page 15 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Figure 6: Images from Various Safe Firearm Storage Campaign Materials

We also identified educational materials that show physicians how they 

can speak to the parents of their pediatric patients about safe firearm 

storage and firearm safety generally. For example, American Academy of 

Pediatrics officials told us that the topic of firearm storage has been 

added to the “Bright Futures” curriculum, which is a protocol funded by 

the Health Resources and Services Administration, an agency within 
Page 16 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

HHS, to provide guidance to physicians that care for children and 

adolescents at routine pediatric appointments.

The safe storage educational materials that we identified were all directed 

to adults, but varied in how the information was conveyed to them. For 

example, nearly all of the programs that we contacted used the Internet to 

convey their materials to parents and to gun owners directly, but some 

programs used organizational partners, gun shop retailers, and medical 

providers to help disseminate educational materials:

• Organizational Partnerships: Several of the organizations we 

contacted said they used partnerships across the country or in the 

community to distribute their materials and to build support for their 

programs. For example, NSSF officials indicated that they have 

partnerships with over 15,000 communities to distribute their safety 

materials, and they recently launched a nationwide suicide prevention 

and firearms education program in partnership with the American 

Foundation for Suicide Prevention. Recognizing that many individuals 

have strong beliefs about firearms, officials from some organizations, 

such as the New Hampshire Firearm Safety Coalition, said it was 

important to bring diverse firearm perspectives together with a goal 

that all could agree on—preventing firearm injuries and deaths. As 

such, officials from this organization and the Harvard Injury Control 

Research Center’s “Means Matter” Campaign indicated that the 

partnerships they developed with firearm safety and suicideprevention groups, gun shop owners, sportsman clubs, and advocates 

have supported their educational efforts about suicide prevention and 

safe storage. These officials added that gun rights groups are wellsuited to bring forward messages of firearm safety and safe storage 

and that their efforts have resulted in such collaborations in 21 states.

Additionally, the Brady Center partnered with the American Academy 

of Pediatrics and the National PTA, to promote “ASK Day 2017”—

which served to remind parents and caregivers of the importance of 

asking if there are unlocked firearms in homes where children play.

• Gun Shop Retailers: New Hampshire Firearm Safety Coalition’s 

efforts to engage local gun shop owners are part of its “Gun Shop 

Project,” where shops in the state distribute firearm storage and 

suicide-prevention information to their customers. This approach, 

however, has not been feasible in other areas. While officials in King 

County’s “Lok-It-Up” program said they wanted to follow the New 

Hampshire coalition’s model, they reported that gun shop owners in 

Seattle were not receptive to distributing suicide-prevention 
Page 17 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

information to their customers because they thought it would convey a 

negative connotation on their product.

• Medical Providers: In addition to The American Academy of 

Pediatrics’ efforts to educate parents through pediatricians using their 

“Bright Futures” curriculum, other organizations also provided safe 

storage materials to local medical providers to reach their patients. 

For example, the Arizona Firearm Injury Prevention Coalition provides 

safe storage materials to pediatricians and hospitals in the state, such 

as the Phoenix Children’s Hospital. This coalition also conducts 

presentations at these hospitals that include information on the 

statistics of firearm injuries and deaths, safe handling and storage of 

firearms, and other related topics. Additionally, last year the San 

Francisco VA Health Care System hosted a conference that focused 

on educating mental health providers about counseling veterans at 

risk for suicide on safe storage of firearms and other lethal means. 

Some of the organizations we contacted indicated that educating 

health care providers, who may be uncomfortable raising the issue of 

firearms with their patients, enables the providers to reach their 

patients. According to officials at the American Academy of Pediatrics, 

in addition to being uncomfortable, some physicians reported that they 

are not clear on their rights to counsel patients on firearms in light of 

some state laws that restrict what they may ask.26

We also found two organizations that developed firearm safety programs 

geared toward children. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has 

developed the “Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program,” which is a firearm 

accident prevention program that seeks to teach children from prekindergarten through fourth grade what to do if they encounter an 

unsecured firearm. This program provides curriculum materials, such as 

instructor guides by age that can be used by law enforcement agencies, 

schools, hospitals, day care centers, or libraries to teach children about 

 26According to American Academy of Pediatrics officials, some pediatricians are confused 

about what they are legally allowed to ask in light of some state laws that restrict physician 

communication related to firearms. For example, Florida enacted a law in 2011 to, among 

other things, restrict doctors and other health care providers from asking about gun 

ownership unless the information is relevant to medical care or safety. This provision of 

the law was challenged and most recently overturned by the United States Court of 

Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Officials at the National Law Center to Prevent Gun 

Violence told us that Minnesota, Missouri, and Montana also have state laws that limit 

what providers can ask or record in medical records regarding household firearms. 

American Academy of Pediatrics officials told us that they are working with their 

membership to clarify what they can discuss with patients regarding the presence of 

firearms in the home. 
Page 18 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

firearm safety. The “Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program” specifies four steps 

that children should take if they find a firearm: stop, do not touch the 

firearm, run away from it, and tell an adult about the firearm. The program

also provides other items, such as child activity books, student reward 

stickers, and a web video, that can be used to reinforce this message. 

The National Center for the Prevention of Community Violence followed 

the NRA’s model by developing a state-specific program in Virginia public 

schools, called “Finnegan Fox.” For the “Finnegan Fox” program, this 

organization worked with the Virginia Department of Education to develop 

the “Elementary School Gun Safety Guidelines and Curriculum” for 

kindergarten through fifth-grade classrooms. These guidelines include 

lesson plans by grade, suggested scripts, and student materials. Similar 

to NRA’s safety steps, the “Finnegan Fox” curriculum specifies that 

children encountering a firearm at home, school, or in the community 

should “Leave it Alone, Leave the Area, Let an Adult Know.”

Four of the programs we identified also distribute safe storage devices, 

such as cable locks, trigger locks, and lock boxes to the public, health 

providers, law enforcement, or others at no cost to the recipient. For 

example, NSSF’s “Project ChildSafe” program provides cable locks to the 

public as part of a free gun safety kit distributed through law enforcement 

departments and VA medical centers. Additionally, NSSF officials 

reported that they have partnered with the state of Utah to distribute 

trigger locks as a part of the state’s firearm safety courses. An official 

from the Arizona Firearm Injury Prevention Coalition indicated that the 

organization also distributes free cable locks throughout Arizona, but 

does not supply them directly to the public. Rather, it provides them to 

organizations in the state—such as the children’s hospital, the human 

services office, and the Arizona Department of Health Services, as well 

as the Arizona Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics—that 

pass them along to pediatricians, according to this official. A “Bulletproof 

Kids” official also said that the program distributes free firearm cable locks 

at health fairs and to physicians’ offices to pass along to their patients. 

Additionally, Seattle Children’s Hospital hosts large-scale trigger lock and 

lock box giveaway events at sporting goods stores around the state. 

According to Seattle Children’s Hospital officials, the goal of these events 

is to increase access to, and teach proper use of, safe gun storage 

devices. These officials added that they bring 350 lock boxes and 50 

trigger locks to distribute, and that each event participant receives handson training on how to use the device, as well as the opportunity to 

practice using it. Averaging about four events per year and with each 

event costing about $20,000 to coordinate, officials reported that it is 

Distribution of Safe 

Storage Devices
Page 19 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

difficult to procure funding to expand the program or host more events. 

(See fig. 7.)

Figure 7: Image from a Trigger Lock and Lock box Distribution Event Sponsored by 

Seattle Children’s Hospital
Page 20 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Researchers and officials from some federal agencies we spoke with said 

that safe storage, as with other gun safety issues, has not been widely 

studied, citing, as primary reasons, a lack of funding and data. On the 

funding issue, CDC officials and a researcher pointed to a federal 

appropriations restriction on CDC’s use of funds to advocate or promote 

gun control. The restriction, commonly known as the Dickey Amendment, 

was first enacted in 1996 and has been re-enacted in subsequent 

appropriations acts, with the scope extended to cover all HHS agencies 

beginning in fiscal year 2012.27 CDC officials said that after the restriction 

was enacted, the agency interpreted it as a prohibition of activities related 

to gun control advocacy, but not as a restriction of activities that 

supported firearm injury-related data collection and scientific research. 

However, CDC officials added that the agency has limited its firearmrelated research over time because, in 1997, its budget was reduced by 

an amount equal to what the agency had spent on such research, and 

because it learned that further reductions were possible if the research 

continued. Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH), another HHS 

agency, became subject to this appropriations restriction in 2012, NIH 

officials stated that from their perspective, this did not preclude the 

agency from funding firearm research. NIH continues to have a broad 

research portfolio that supports violence prevention, including firearm 

safety. Nevertheless, NIH officials stated that funding instability has 

 

27See Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997, Pub. L. No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 

3009, 3009-244 (1996), which specified “that none of the funds made available for injury 

prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to 

advocate or promote gun control.” See also Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. 

L. No. 112-74, § 218, 125 Stat. 786, 1085 (2011), which extended this restriction to other 

HHS agencies, including the National Institutes of Health in 2012. 

While Research and 

Evaluations of 

Programs Are 

Limited, Some 

Studies Suggest Lock 

Distribution May 

Encourage Safer 

Firearm Storage

There is Relatively Little 

Research on Safe Firearm 

Storage; However Some 

Studies Indicate that Lock 

Distribution Efforts May Be 

Promising
Page 21 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

limited firearm research throughout the research community. Officials at 

DOJ cited a similar perspective, noting that, as the primary agency 

supporting this type of research, DOJ has had difficulty funding a 

consistent body of work in this field. Further, they said that there are a 

small number of individuals who have sufficient expertise.

Several researchers we spoke with discussed funding challenges and 

their implications. A researcher from the University of Washington cited a 

lack of funding as the biggest challenge in this field and remarked that the 

number of funding announcements related to firearm research is 

extremely low when compared with announcements for research on 

cancer, HIV, or other public health issues. A researcher from 

Northeastern University noted that private foundations are the primary 

funders for firearm research, though not many organizations have 

stepped in to fill the gap in funding. As such, this researcher added that 

the limited research has inhibited the growth of experts in this field 

because researchers seek stable funding sources for their work. A 

researcher from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center said that he 

discourages new students from firearm research exclusively because 

they will not be able to make a living in that research area alone. He 

added that he has needed to work on other public health issues, such as 

obesity, because there is currently more funding in that area.

While agency officials and researchers in the field told us about the lack 

of funding related to firearm research, a recent analysis that appeared in 

the Journal of the American Medical Association quantified this assertion 

by comparing firearm-related research to research for other leading 

causes of death.28 Citing CDC’s statistic of over 30,000 firearm-related 

fatalities annually, this analysis sought to assess whether funding and 

publication of firearm research are disproportionately low relative to the 

mortality rate associated with firearms. The analysis mapped CDC death 

statistics for the top 30 causes of death in the United States with 

conditions or diseases from a publications database and funding data 

from a NIH database of federal grants.29 The analysis found that research 

 28See D.E. Stark and N.H. Shah, “Funding and Publication of Research on Gun Violence 

and Other Leading Causes of Death,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 

317, no. 1 (2017).

29The article indicates that CDC-derived causes of death were manually mapped to their 

corresponding Medical Subject Heading term(s) and queried in MEDLINE, a biomedical 

journal article database, for studies between 2004 and 2015. Additionally, the researchers 

used research funding data from NIH’s Federal RePORTER database. 
Page 22 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

on firearms receives disproportionately low funding and has fewer 

publications compared to other top causes of death. For example, the 

analysis noted that there were a comparable number of deaths related to 

firearms as related to sepsis—which is a potentially life-threatening 

complication of an infection. However, funding for firearm research was 

about 0.7 percent of that for sepsis and the volume of publications was 

about 4 percent of that for sepsis. While sepsis is a very different health 

concern than firearm-related deaths, the study also found less funding 

and fewer publications for firearms than comparable injury-related causes 

of death, such as motor vehicle accidents and poisonings. In contrast, the 

analysis showed funding levels and numbers of publications related to 

influenza and pneumonia and heart disease research that were 

commensurate with the considerable number of deaths associated with 

these conditions.

Some of the researchers we spoke with also cited a lack of data as 

another reason why firearm-related injuries and deaths are not well 

studied. For example, researchers at Northeastern University and 

Harvard cited CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System as a 

prior, but limited, effort to collect national and state-specific data on the 

presence of firearms in homes. This system collects data on healthrelated risk behaviors, among other things, through telephone surveys; 

however, the researchers noted that it has not included questions related 

to firearm safety and storage for all states since 2004.30 According to 

CDC, the system collected data about the presence of firearms in homes 

across all states three times—in 2001, 2002, and 2004—and it assessed 

storage practices in two of these years.31 States, however, can voluntarily 

add these questions for their residents at the state’s expense. According 

to officials in Washington’s King County’s “Lok-it-Up” program, 

Washington and New Mexico have periodically added these questions. 

However, CDC officials told us that state coordinators for the Behavioral 

 30The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System collects state data about United States 

residents through health-related telephone surveys in all 50 states as well as the District of 

Columbia and three U.S. territories—interviewing over 400,000 adults as part of the effort 

each year. The questionnaire contains three parts: 1) the core component, 2) optional 

modules, and 3) state-added questions.

31CDC officials indicated that prior to the 2000s, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance 

System included optional modules with firearm questions in its surveys from 1995 to 1998. 

Officials added that each year, system coordinators from state and territorial health 

departments decide which questions to include on the core survey as well as proposed 

optional modules. With the exception of the question on safety belts, state coordinators 

voted to drop all injury questions—such as drinking and driving, and firearm safety—from 

the annual survey in 2004 to allow for the inclusion of questions on other health topics.
Page 23 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Risk Factor Surveillance System approved an optional firearm module for 

inclusion in the 2017 survey. The proposal to include an optional module 

was based on recommendations from the Institute of Medicine and 

federal partners about ways to strengthen data systems available for 

firearm research.32

From 120 results in our literature review, and additional research, we 

identified 12 studies that evaluated one of two safe storage approaches: 

locking device distribution efforts and physician consultation of firearm 

storage with patients. An additional four studies analyzed the 

effectiveness of interventions to promote safe behaviors in children when 

they come across an unsecured firearm. The remaining studies from the 

literature review often related to firearm prevalence as opposed to 

storage of firearms, and were either descriptive or contained evaluations 

not focused on safe storage. Our review of the studies relating to safe 

storage approaches (device distribution and physician consultation) found 

that providing a free locking device to study participants influenced 

behavior to store firearms more safely and physician consultation 

generally did not. While some of these studies were limited by small 

sample sizes or a focus on a specific population, other recently published 

research supports this conclusion as well.33 In a 2016 study, researchers 

conducted a systematic review that found that the provision of free 

locking devices improved storage practices.34 Our review found:

Locking Device Distribution: Five of the 12 studies that we identified 

evaluated the effectiveness of efforts to provide free firearm locking 

devices such as a cable lock, trigger lock, or gun safe/cabinet. All five 

studies found that gun owners given a locking device began using the 

device to store their firearms more safely compared to a control group or 

based on surveys given before and after receiving the device. Three of 

these five studies used self-reported data on participants’ use of the 

 32On July 1, 2015, the Institute of Medicine became known as the National Academy of 

Medicine.

33Some of the studies that we identified used a small sample size, which means that 

results may not be generalizable to a larger population. Additionally, some of the studies 

relied on self-reported data, which may be subject to bias due to participants wanting to 

provide socially desirable responses. Some of these studies tried to overcome these 

limitations by using a control group and conducting direct observation.

34Rowhani-Rahbar, A., et al. “Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Safe Firearm 

Storage.”
Page 24 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

device,35 while two of the studies directly observed that participants were 

actually using the device. 36 In particular:

• Self-reported data: In one study, researchers conducted a national, 

randomized control trial of 137 pediatric practices and distributed 

educational materials and cable locks to parents of some patients and 

not to others.37 The researchers relied on self-reported data that was 

collected by following up with study participants. After 6 months, 

researchers contacted participants who had received the educational 

materials and cable locks and found that they reported an increase 

(from 59 percent to 68 percent) in use of the cable locks since they 

received them. Over the same period of time, the percentage of 

respondents in the control group, who did not receive these devices, 

reported that their use of cable locks decreased from 64 percent to 52 

percent.

• Direct observation: In another study, researchers delivered free metal 

gun cabinets to 255 households in six villages in western Alaska.38

Rather than relying exclusively on self-reported information from study 

participants, the researchers directly observed that participants began 

using the cabinets given to them to store their firearms. Study 

participants were separated into two groups—one received their 

cabinets at the start of the study, and the other following the first 

assessment. Researchers later conducted unannounced visits to 

participants’ homes at 12 and 18 months after the installation of the 

cabinets. In the group that first received their cabinets, researchers 

found that the rate of homes containing unlocked guns dropped from 

 35Barkin S. L., et al., “Is Office-Based Counseling about Media Use, Timeouts, and 

Firearm Storage Effective? Results from a Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial,” 

Pediatrics, vol. 122, no. 1 (2008); Carbone, P.S., C.J. Clemens, and T.M. Ball, 

“Effectiveness of Gun-safety Counseling and a Gun Lock Giveaway in a Hispanic 

Community,” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, vol. 159, (2005); CoyneBeasley, T., V.J. Schoenbach, and R.M. Johnson, “Love Our Kids, Lock Your Guns: A 

Community-based Firearm Safety Counseling and Gun Lock Distribution Program,” 

Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, vol. 115, no. 659-664 (2001).

36Grossman, D. C., et al., “Improving Firearm Storage in Alaska Native Villages: A 

Randomized Trial of Household Gun Cabinets,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 

102, no. S2 (2012); and Horn, A., et al. “Community Based Program to Improve Firearm 

Practices in Rural Alaska,” Injury Prevention, vol. 9, no. 231-234, (2003).

37Barkin S. L., et al. “Is Office-Based Counseling about Media Use, Timeouts, and Firearm 

Storage Effective? Results from a Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial.” 

38Grossman D.C., et al. “Improving Firearm Storage in Alaska Native Villages: A 

Randomized Trial of Household Gun Cabinets.” 
Page 25 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

95 percent to 35 percent at the 12-month visit. Additionally, the 

percentage of homes that kept ammunition unlocked also dropped 

from 89 percent to 36 percent over the same time frame. Further, 

researchers observed very little change in behavior among 

participants who had not yet received the storage cabinet and kept 

firearms and ammunition unlocked at the 12-month visit. This group 

began showing safe behaviors with firearms and ammunition similar 

to the first group after they were given the gun safes, which 

researchers observed during the 18-month visit.

Physician Consultation: Seven of the 12 studies that we identified 

evaluated the effectiveness of physicians’ efforts to encourage patients to 

store their guns safely through counseling and, in some cases, providing 

written educational materials.39 The overall results of these studies were 

mixed—with four finding little or no benefit to the physician intervention, 

and three finding some increase in safe storage behaviors among the 

groups who received counseling. The effectiveness of physician 

counseling also varied based on the setting and type of physician who 

administered the counseling. These studies examined interventions in the 

primary care, mental health clinic, and emergency care settings. 

• Primary Care Setting: Four studies found that physician consultation 

had little or no effect on changing patient behavior to store firearms 

more safely. Three of these studies targeted patients through pediatric 

primary care settings. For example, one of these three studies 

included nearly 1,300 households divided into a control group and an 

intervention group.40 Households in the intervention group that did not 

 39Albright, T.L. and S.K. Burge, “Improving Firearm Storage Habits: Impact of Brief Office 

Counseling by Family Physicians,” Journal of the American Board of Family Practice, vol. 

16, no. 1 (2003); Brent D.A., et al., “Compliance With Recommendations to Remove 

Firearms in Families Participating in a Clinical Trial for Adolescent Depression,” Journal of 

the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 39, no. 10 (2000); 

Grossman D.C. et al., “Firearm Safety Counseling in Primary Care Pediatrics: A

Randomized, Controlled Trial,” Pediatrics, vol. 106, no. 1 (2000); Kruesi, M.J.P., et al., 

“Suicide and Violence Prevention: Parent Education in the Emergency Department,” 

Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 38, no. 3 

(1999); Oatis, P.J., et al., “Pediatric Practice Based Evaluation of the Steps to Prevent 

Firearm Injury Program,” Injury Prevention, vol. 5, no. 48-52 (1999); Runyan, C.W., et al., 

“Lethal Means Counseling for Parents of Youth Seeking Emergency Care for Suicidality,” 

Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, vol. 17, no. 1, (2016); Stevens, M.M., et al., “A 

Pediatric, Practice-based, Randomized Trial of Drinking and Smoking Prevention and 

Bicycle Helmet, Gun, and Seatbelt Safety Promotion,” Pediatrics, vol. 109, no. 3, (2002).

40Grossman D.C., et al. “Firearm Safety Counseling in Primary Care Pediatrics: A 

Randomized, Controlled Trial.” 
Page 26 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

own a firearm were advised against buying one, while households that 

owned firearms were advised to remove them from the home as the 

safest approach for the family. Households that were not willing to 

remove the firearms were advised to store them unloaded and locked. 

These households were also given a folder with safety materials and 

a coupon for a storage device. Three months following the 

intervention, the researchers mailed a survey to all households and 

found no statistically significant differences between the control group 

and the intervention group. According to this study’s results, the 

intervention group was no more likely to remove a firearm from the 

home or purchase a safe storage device than were households in the 

control group.

• Mental Health Clinic Setting: One study was conducted by mental 

health professionals and social workers in a mental health clinic as 

part of a clinical trial.41 The study, which offered therapy to 107 

adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 with major depressive 

disorder and counseling to their parents, found that encouraging the 

parents to remove firearms from the home was not effective. 

Participants reported whether or not they owned a firearm through 

surveys administered following a three-month therapy phase and at 

two years following therapy. At the end of therapy, 99 families 

participated in the survey. Of the 26 families that owned firearms, 7 

families (26.9 percent) removed firearms from the home, while the 

remaining 19 did not. Of the 73 families that did not previously own 

firearms, 4 families (5.5 percent) acquired at least one, while the 

remaining 69 did not. During a two-year follow-up in which 95 families 

responded, including 25 of the 26 families that initially owned firearms, 

9 families (36 percent) no longer kept firearms in the home, while 12 

(17.1 percent ) of the 70 families that did not own firearms had 

acquired one. Researchers noted that including additional safe 

storage options during counseling beyond removing the firearms 

altogether, may help to improve compliance. 

• Emergency Care Setting: Two studies took place in an emergency 

care setting and involved mental health professionals or emergency 

department staff counseling parents or guardians of patients at risk for 

suicide to prevent access to lethal means, such as firearms and 

medications that could be used to commit suicide. These studies 

 41Brent D.A., “Compliance With Recommendations to Remove Firearms in Families 

Participating in a Clinical Trial for Adolescent Depression.”
Page 27 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

showed a positive change in safe storage behaviors.42 For example, 

one study counseled parents or guardians of patients who were aged 

12 to 17 and received psychiatric care for suicidal ideation. For the 52 

counseled families that reported they had firearms in the household, 

researchers followed up with 33 of them and learned that two-thirds 

had kept all firearms locked in their home prior to the counseling 

intervention. However, during the follow-up telephone interviews after 

the intervention, the study found that all parents reported that all 

firearms in the home were kept locked.

Child Education: Our literature review identified four additional studies 

that were not directly related to safe storage, but evaluated efforts to 

educate children on how to respond if they encounter an unsecured 

firearm. Three of these studies involved behavioral skills training featuring 

instructor demonstrations that taught children the ideal safe behaviors—

which were generally to not touch the firearm, leave the area, and tell an 

adult. The fourth study included lessons on making good decisions and 

understanding conflict in addition to some behavioral skills training. All 

four studies found that behavioral skills training did not instill consistent 

safe firearm habits in young children.43 For example, one study of 4- and 

5-year-old children placed them in two groups to compare the 

effectiveness of two different child safety courses.44 This comparison 

included testing the children in both groups in different scenarios with 

firearms after five training sessions and providing feedback based on the 

children’s behavior. The study found that most children of both groups 

were able to verbally recall the safety message. However, on average, 

the children in both groups did not leave the area or tell an adult when 

they found a gun during the assessment. One of these four studies 

focused on slightly older children (6- and 7-year-olds) and found better 

 42Kruesi, M.J.P., et al. “Suicide and Violence Prevention: Parent Education in the 

Emergency Department,” Runyan, C.W., et al. “Lethal Means Counseling for Parents of 

Youth Seeking Emergency Care for Suicidality.”

43Hardy, M.S., et al. “A Firearm Safety Program for Children: They Just Can’t Say No,” 

Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, vol. 17, no. 4 (1996); Hardy, M.S., “Teaching 

Firearm Safety to Children: Failure of a Program,” Developmental and Behavioral 

Pediatrics, vol. 23, no. 2 (2002); Himle, M.B., et al., “An Evaluation of Two Procedures for 

Training Skills to Prevent Gun Play in Children,” Pediatrics, vol. 113, no. 1, (2004); 

Miltenberger, R. et al., “Evaluating Behavioral Skills Training with and without Simulated In 

Situ Training for Teaching Safety Skills to Children,” Education and Treatment of Children, 

vol. 32, no. 1 (2009).

44Himle, M.B., et al. “An Evaluation of Two Procedures for Training Skills to Prevent Gun 

Play in Children.”
Page 28 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

retention of firearm safety principles among those receiving training with 

simulated situations.45 However, intensive training was needed to achieve 

that result. In this study, researchers placed 43 children into three groups.

Each group went through several rounds of training and then assessment 

until all desired behaviors were repeated. At the start of the study, one 

group received behavioral skills training, another received training with 

simulated situations, and a third group—the control group—did not 

receive any initial training.46 Following the first round of training and 

assessment, and each subsequent assessment, all three groups were 

given additional training with simulated situations. After instructor 

assessments and additional training, it ultimately took three rounds of 

training before all of the children in the simulated situations training group 

exhibited the safe responses, and four rounds of training for the 

behavioral skills training group to achieve a comparable outcome. Most, 

but not all—88 percent—of the children in the control group achieved the 

desired result.

Most of the 16 programs that we identified that provided safe storage 

education, and in some cases free locking devices, had not evaluated 

their safe storage efforts, but many were able to assess the reach of their 

programs. Three of the 16—Seattle Children’s Hospital, the “ASK 

Campaign,” and “Bulletproof Kids”—evaluated aspects of their programs 

through surveys to determine the program’s effect on their local 

populations.

To determine whether its lock box and trigger lock giveaway events 

increased the use of safe gun storage devices, Seattle Children’s Hospital 

surveyed participants in three of their giveaway events in 2015 and 2016 

both before providing the devices and again at about 4 to 6 weeks. 

Surveying 206 of 415 participants that had received a free locking device 

from the program, researchers asked how participants stored their 

firearms and ammunition, as well as storage preferences. Finding that 

nearly 13 percent of respondents began storing their firearms locked and 

unloaded, with ammunition locked as well, the researchers concluded that 

 45Miltenberger, R., et al. “Evaluating Behavioral Skills Training with and without Simulated 

In Situ Training for Teaching Safety Skills to Children.” 

46Program instructors provided training over multiple rounds and assessed the children 

each round. An instructor assessment found that after the first round of training, all desired 

responses were shown by 27 percent of the basic skills group, 17 percent of the simulated 

situations group, and 6 percent of the control group. 

Few Safe Storage 

Programs In Our Review 

Evaluated Their 

Effectiveness
Page 29 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Seattle Children’s intervention improved safe firearm storage practices 

among participants.47 Additionally, researchers also learned that 

differences in participant preferences for devices suggest that a “onesize-fits-all” approach may be insufficient to influence population-level 

storage practices, as intended.

Researchers published a study in 2012 that evaluated the effectiveness 

of a yearlong implementation of the Brady Center’s “ASK campaign,”

which encourages parents to ask about the presence of unsecured 

firearms in homes that their children may visit.48 The researchers selected 

two Midwestern cities, similar in size and demographics—Rockford, 

Illinois (the intervention city), and Joliet, Illinois (the control city). The 

intervention city was exposed to the campaign and the control city was 

not. The campaign delivered messages through various media, including 

billboards, radio, and newspapers. It also involved local officials and 

community-based groups that participated in hosting events and 

distributing campaign materials. Researchers conducted 1,600 telephone 

surveys in the intervention city and the control city, both before and after 

the campaign to examine the effect the campaign had on parental 

behavior.49 After the campaign, 7 percent of respondents in the 

intervention city had heard of the “ASK campaign” and knew it was about 

firearm safety compared to less than 1 percent in the control city. The 

percentage of respondents who said they were likely to ask about 

household firearms in the future increased slightly in the intervention city 

(72 to 75 percent) but not in the control city (70 to 69 percent). However, 

the percentage of respondents who had ever asked about the presence 

of firearms in homes their children visit decreased slightly in the 

intervention city (33 percent to 31 percent) but increased slightly in the 

control city (26 to 31 percent). This suggests that expressed intentions to 

ask about the presence of firearms do not always translate to changes in 

behavior. Of respondents in the intervention city after the campaign, 

 47Simonetti, J., Rowhani-Rahbar, A., King, C., Bennett, E., Rivara, F., “Evaluation of a 

community-based safe firearm and ammunition storage intervention,” Injury Prevention, 

June 22 2017, accessed July 18, 2017. 

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/early/2017/06/22/injuryprev-2016-042292.

48 See Johnson, R.M., Lintz, J., Gross, D., Miller, M., and Hemenway, D., “Evaluation of 

the ASK Campaign in Two Midwestern Cities,” International Scholarly Research Network, 

vol. 2012.

49This evaluation cited limitations to the research such as its limited generalizability 

because it addresses experiences in two midsized cities and evaluates short-term effects 

of the campaigns. 
Page 30 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

those who had seen or heard the campaign’s message were significantly 

more likely to have asked about firearms in homes their children visit than 

respondents who had not seen or heard the campaign’s message (40 

percent compared to 26 percent).

On a smaller scale, the “Bulletproof Kids” program—which aims to 

educate pediatricians about talking to the parents of their patients about 

safe storage—evaluated whether physicians in the area were familiar with 

the program and whether it affected the way that they counseled the 

parents of patients about firearms in the home. To do so, a program 

official surveyed members of the Utah chapter of the American Academy 

of Pediatrics. With 84 pediatricians participating in the survey, the 

program found that 56 pediatricians (two-thirds) had heard of the 

“Bulletproof Kids” campaign, while 28 (one-third) were not familiar with it. 

The survey also found that just over half of the pediatricians surveyed 

indicated that the campaign had positively affected how they counseled 

families on safe storage, while the other half reported that it had not 

affected their interaction with patients. The survey also provided insight 

on the extent to which the surveyed pediatricians ask the parents of 

patients about the presence of firearms in the home and method of 

storage. Accordingly, the results indicated that about 20 percent of the 

surveyed pediatricians routinely ask about firearms and storage in the 

home, while 40 percent sometimes ask and nearly 40 percent do not 

routinely ask.

In addition to evaluating their programs, the “ASK Campaign,” “Bulletproof 

Kids” and Seattle Children’s Hospital also tracked the scope of their 

efforts. For example, an official at the Brady Center indicated that “ASK 

Campaign” materials were distributed by 60,000 pediatricians to their 

patients and families. A “Bulletproof Kids” official stated that since the 

program’s inception in 2013, it had distributed about 1,000 posters, 600 

brochures, 1,000 gun locks, and put up 17 billboards in the state. Officials 

at Seattle Children’s Hospital said that since December 2014, they 

distributed nearly 2,800 lock boxes and over 250 trigger locks at an 

average of 4 events per year.

Officials from the 13 remaining programs reported that they had not 

evaluated their efforts to promote safe storage, but in some cases, they 

could determine how many locking devices their programs distributed or 

the extent to which their educational materials were used. For example:

• An official from the Arizona Firearm Injury Prevention Coalition—

which provides cable locks to children’s hospitals, state health and 
Page 31 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

human services offices, and the Arizona Chapter of the American 

Academy of Pediatrics—said that the program has given out over 

13,000 cable locks since its inception in 2005.

• “Project ChildSafe”—which is a national program sponsored by NSSF 

that provides free safety kits, including materials on safe storage and 

a cable gun lock to the public—has distributed 37 million safety kits 

across the United States, according to NSSF officials.50

• The New Hampshire Firearms Safety Coalition’s “Gun Shop Project,”

which partnered with local gun shop owners to distribute suicideprevention brochures, posters, and hotline cards to its customers, 

included an effort to determine if the gun shops were carrying and 

providing the materials. Coalition officials stated that after conducting 

unannounced, in-person visits to nearly every gun shop in the state, 

they found that almost 50 percent of the 67 gun shops they visited 

had the coalition’s suicide-prevention resources available for 

customers in the store.

We provided a draft of this report to DOJ, HHS, Interior, and VA for 

review and comment. DOJ, Interior, and VA did not provide any 

comments while HHS provided technical comments, which we 

incorporated as appropriate.

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from its 

date. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretaries of the 

Departments of Health and Human Services, Interior, and Veterans 

Affairs, as well as the Attorney General of the United States. In addition, 

the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at 

http://www.gao.gov.

 50One of the organizations we contacted indicated that one of its initiatives will include an 

evaluation component. NSSF recently launched an expansion of its Project ChildSafe 

initiative called Project ChildSafe Communities. According to DOJ, this initiative was 

based on a $2,446,888 grant funded through the Justice Assistance Grant Program, which 

received, as part of its fiscal year 2015 appropriation, $3 million for competitive grants to 

distribute firearm safety materials and gun locks. See Consolidated and Further 

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Pub. L. No. 113-235, div. B, tit. II, 128 Stat. 2130, 

2192 (2014). NSSF launched its program in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. An evaluation of 

the program is expected in 2018. 

Agency Comments
Page 32 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-7114 or crossem@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this 

report are listed in appendix IV.

Marcia Crosse

Director, Health Care
Page 33 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

List of Requesters

The Honorable Patty Murray

Ranking Member

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

United States Senate

The Honorable Tammy Baldwin

United States Senate

The Honorable Richard Blumenthal

United States Senate

The Honorable Sherrod Brown

United States Senate

The Honorable Benjamin L. Cardin

United States Senate

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper

United States Senate

The Honorable Richard J. Durbin

United States Senate

The Honorable Dianne Feinstein

United States Senate

The Honorable Kirsten Gillibrand

United States Senate

The Honorable Mazie K. Hirono

United States Senate

The Honorable Tim Kaine

United States Senate

The Honorable Edward J. Markey

United States Senate

The Honorable Robert Menendez

United States Senate
Page 34 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

The Honorable Christopher Murphy

United States Senate

The Honorable Jack Reed

United States Senate

The Honorable Charles E. Schumer

United States Senate

The Honorable Elizabeth Warren

United States Senate

The Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse

United States Senate

The Honorable Ron Wyden

United States Senate
Appendix I: Organizations Contacted

Page 35 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

In addition to contacting agency officials at the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), the Department of the Interior (Interior), the 

Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA), we also contacted researchers and experts in the field of firearm 

safety and representatives from 22 organizations that either conduct 

research in this field or have campaigns or programs related to safe 

firearm storage, including medical associations, academic institutions, 

and a county government. Many of the safe storage campaigns or 

programs that we identified were largely funded privately through 

donations, but some programs received federal, state, or local funds. 

Those programs receiving federal grants are identified in appendix III. 

The organizations and their corresponding campaigns or programs 

related to safe storage (if applicable) are as follows:1

• American Academy of Pediatrics (Bright Futures Curriculum)

• American Medical Association

• Arizona Firearm Injury Prevention Coalition

• Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence (ASK Campaign; Suicide 

Proof Your Home)

• Bulletproof Kids 

• Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership

• Everytown for Gun Safety (Be SMART Campaign)

• Harvard Injury Control Research Center (Means Matter)

• Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research

• Johns Hopkins School of Public Health

• Joyce Foundation and Fund for a Safer Future

• King County, Washington (Lok-It-Up)

• Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

• National Center for the Prevention of Community Violence

• National Crime Prevention Council/Ad Council (Lock It Up)

• National Rifle Association (Eddie Eagle)

• National Shooting Sports Foundation (Project ChildSafe)

 1

Organizations with safe storage campaigns or programs are in bolded text.

Appendix I: Organizations Contacted
Appendix I: Organizations Contacted

Page 36 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

• New Hampshire Firearm Safety Coalition (Gun Shop Project)

• Northeastern University

• Seattle Children’s Hospital

• Smart Tech Challenges Foundation

• University of Washington
Appendix II: Firearm Safety Technologies

Page 37 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Personalized firearms—which are also referred to as “smart guns,” “userauthorized guns,” and “childproof guns”—can be an approach to firearm 

safety.1 The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) National Institute of Justice 

(NIJ) defines personalized firearms as those that “utilize integrated 

components that exclusively permit an authorized user or set of users to 

operate or fire the gun and automatically deactivate it under a set of 

specific circumstances, reducing the chances of accidental or purposeful 

use by an unauthorized user.”2 A representative of the Smart Tech 

Challenges Foundation, which funds firearm safety technology research 

and development, similarly described a personalized firearm as including 

a safety feature or features that allows it to fire only when activated by an 

authorized user. The representative added that such features can prevent 

misuse, accidental shootings, gun thefts, use of the weapon against the 

owner, and self-harm.

There are two main categories of smart gun technologies that may be 

included in a gun’s design or retrofitted to a traditional firearm:

• Biometric technology. Biometric authentication can be used as a form 

of identification and limit access to a firearm by using unique features 

of individuals—such as fingerprints or grip recognition—as the “key” to 

identify authorized users and deactivate a blocking mechanism to 

allow the firearm to discharge.

• Radio frequency identification (RFID). This technology uses a shortrange electronic sensor. A radio chip responsible for gun access is 

placed in a gun handle, and a corresponding chip is placed on a ring, 

watch, or bracelet, or can even be implanted in an authorized 

shooter’s hand. In order for the firearm to discharge, it must be in 

close proximity to the corresponding chip, otherwise it will not fire. As 

soon as the chips are separated, the firearm will automatically lock 

again, not allowing it to fire.

An official from DOJ told us that these technologies—which are currently 

used in other products such as smartphones and security systems—have 

not been integrated into firearms that are currently on the market.

 1

NIJ officials, a researcher, and a representative from the Smart Tech Challenges 

Foundation told us that terms such as “personalized guns,” “smart guns,” “user-authorized 

guns,” and “childproof guns” are generally, but not always, interchangeable.

2

See Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, A Review of Gun Safety 

Technologies, NCJ 242500 (Washington, D.C: June 2013). 

Appendix II: Firearm Safety Technologies
Appendix II: Firearm Safety Technologies

Page 38 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

DOJ has had a role in supporting the development and integration of this 

technology in firearms through both NIJ and also its Bureau of Justice 

Assistance (BJA). DOJ officials indicated that they began looking into 

personalized firearms in the 1990s. In the 2000s, DOJ awarded at least 

$12.9 million in grants through NIJ and BJA to firearm manufacturers for 

various efforts to incorporate the technology in firearms. (See app. III for 

more information about the grants awarded by DOJ.) In addition to 

awarding grants, DOJ has also reviewed the development of personalized 

firearms. NIJ released a report in June 2013 reviewing the status of gun 

safety technology.3 This report listed three personalized firearms that 

were ready, or nearly ready, for commercial production: 1) a shotgun with 

an RFID ring, 2) a handgun with an RFID wristband,4 and 3) an add-on 

fingerprint sensor for a handgun.

In October 2015, NIJ issued the Gun Safety Technology Challenge—

which was intended to test the reliability of prototypes for personal 

firearms and obtain a baseline of the status of the technology.5 The 

challenge, which consisted of a three-stage evaluation of the reliability 

and durability of smart gun technology, received 14 submissions from 

developers, according to NIJ officials. However, these officials told us that 

12 of the 14 submissions were ineligible because they were concepts 

rather than functional products.6 Of the two remaining submissions, one 

applicant was determined to be ineligible, leaving only one other 

 3

See A Review of Gun Safety Technologies, June 2013.

4

Two officials we spoke with indicated that a firearm using the RFID wristband (the 

Armatix iP1, a .22 caliber pistol) was sold at two firearms retailers in California and one in 

Maryland in 2014. However, these retailers discontinued offering the product due to a 

negative response from customers. 

5

DOJ’s Gun Safety Technology Challenge was discussed in a report that DOJ, the 

Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense jointly issued in 

response to President Obama’s January 2016 Memorandum on Promoting Smart Gun 

Technology. See Report to the President Outlining a Strategy to Expedite Deployment of 

Gun Safety Technology (Washington, D.C.: April 2016) and 

http://www.nij.gov/guntechchallenge, accessed on July 7, 2017.

6

In contrast, a representative from the Smart Tech Challenges Foundation stated that the 

foundation includes concepts in its calls for proposals. The representative told us that the 

foundation received a large response from developers who were at different stages of 

development and who designed products such as safes and barrel locks that incorporated 

user-authorized technologies, in addition to smart guns. The representative also noted 

that, in the foundation’s view, it is too early in the development process to require 

submission of a functional product.
Appendix II: Firearm Safety Technologies

Page 39 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

applicant. Due to the low response rate, NIJ terminated the challenge in 

2016, prior to conducting any testing.

NIJ officials stated that they do not have plans to provide additional 

funding for the development of smart gun technologies. The officials 

considered the three personalized firearms mentioned in NIJ’s Review of 

Gun Safety Technologies report to be fairly well developed, but said that 

these firearms were not federally funded. Previous federally funded 

efforts to incorporate personalized technologies did not reach the point of 

readiness for production, according to these officials. As the federal 

grants have ended, development of personalized firearm technology has 

primarily been privately funded. A representative of the Smart Tech 

Challenges Foundation and a researcher from Johns Hopkins University 

cited issues such as funding, reliability, and acceptance of personalized 

firearms among gun owners in the United States as challenges to 

development and production of personalized firearms for the mass 

market. DOJ officials told us that the reliability of existing personalized 

firearms is still unknown. However, NIJ published an interagency report in 

response to a January 2016 Presidential Memorandum. This report 

detailed voluntary baseline specifications on the reliability and other 

characteristics that would be needed in personalized firearms to meet the 

requirements of law enforcement.7

 7

In November 2016, NIJ issued Baseline Specifications for Law Enforcement Service 

Pistols With Security Technology, NCJ 250377 (Washington, D.C.: 2016).
Appendix III: Federal Efforts to Promote 

Firearm Safety

Page 40 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

The federal agencies that we contacted—the Departments of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), Interior, Justice (DOJ), and Veterans Affairs 

(VA)—have various efforts to promote firearm safety. Such efforts 

primarily consist of awarding grants to promote firearm safety, including 

researching firearm safety, developing smart gun technology, producing 

informational materials or public service announcements, and 

implementing firearm safety programs. (See table 1.) Some of the HHS 

grants were for developing firearm safety educational materials and 

interventions, and studying risky firearm behaviors. Interior has funded 

grants for hunter education programs that include safety information. In 

the late 1990s and early 2000s, the grants from DOJ focused on the 

development of smart gun technology, but more recent grants are for the 

implementation and evaluation of firearm safety education and lock 

distribution programs. Aside from awarding grants, DOJ and VA also had 

other efforts to promote firearm safety, such as programs that provide 

safety materials and background checks on prospective gun buyers. (See 

table 2.)

Table 1: Federal Grants Related to Firearm Safety that GAO Identified 

Appendix III: Federal Efforts to Promote 

Firearm Safety

Agency Date(s) Amount Recipient Purpose

Department of the Interior

FWS 1970-present Amount varies by 

state based on 

statutory formula

Hunter education programs in 

all states and territories 

except Washington, D.C.

To provide grants to states for programs that 

instruct in firearm operations and safety, among 

other hunting-related skills and knowledge

Department of Justice

BJA 2013 $1,000,000 National Crime Prevention 

Council

To fund the “Lock It Up” program, which includes 

public service announcements that encourage 

gun owners to store their guns safely 

BJA 2015 $2,466,888 National Shooting Sports 

Foundation

To expand “Project ChildSafe,” a program that 

promotes firearm safety and distributes gun 

locking devices

BJA and NIJ 2004-2014 $4,020,293 New Jersey Institute of 

Technology

To develop a personalized firearm unlocked by 

pressure sensors on the grip

NIJ 1997-2000 $500,079 Colt’s Manufacturing Co. To develop a firearm with a radio frequency 

identification (RFID) wristband; two prototypes 

were delivered

NIJ 2000-2005 $3,673,361 Smith & Wesson To explore various types of firearm 

authentication such as PIN codes, fingerprint 

sensors, and skin tissue spectroscopy; two 

prototypes were delivered

NIJ 2000-2006 $3,606,156 FN Manufacturing, Inc. To develop a firearm unlocked with an RFID ring; 

three prototypes were delivered 
Appendix III: Federal Efforts to Promote 

Firearm Safety

Page 41 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Sources: Data and interviews with the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); National Institutes of Health (NIH); National 

Institute of Justice (NIJ) | GAO-17-665

a

These were individual grants as follows: iGun Technology ($299,389), Exponent ($187,598), 

Mosermation ($299,510),Technology Next ($175,856), and VLe Small Arms ($185,000).

NIJ 2002 $1,147,353a iGun Technology, Exponent, 

Mosermation, Technology 

Next, and VLe Small Arms

For gun manufacturers to develop smart gun 

technologies

NIJ 2013 $1,025,560 University of ColoradoDenverTo study an intervention, delivered in a health 

care setting, designed to decrease home firearm 

access by youth

NIJ 2015 $199,607 RAND Corporation For an evaluation of the National Shooting 

Sports Foundation’s “Project ChildSafe.” (See 

above.)

Department of Health and Human Services

CDC 2012-2015 $22,400 Colorado Injury Control 

Research Center

For an emergency department based program 

that provides counseling on firearms to prevent 

adolescent suicide

CDC 2015-2016 $40,000 Oregon State University To identify culturally competent language and 

public health approaches for promoting firearm 

safety in rural primary care settings with patients 

at risk of suicide and their families

CDC 1995 $100,000 Northwest Media, Inc. To produce media-based education for parents 

on firearm safety

NIH 2002-2005 $2,565,491 University of Pennsylvania To study the relationship between alcohol outlets 

and firearm violence

NIH 2015-2016 $437,910 University of Colorado Denver To examine the adoption in the Mountain West of 

emergency department discharge practices that 

include counseling on limiting access to firearms 

during times of mental health crisis

NIH 2016 $182,304 University of Michigan To study technology-enhanced behavioral 

interventions to decrease youth substance 

misuse and high-risk firearm behaviors 

NIH 2016 $186,437 University of New Hampshire To develop a national youth firearm risk and 

safety assessment tool

NIH 2016 $229,477 Oregon Health and Science 

University

To link data between federal and state agencies 

to allow analysis of rates, risk factors, and 

circumstances of firearm-related injuries and 

deaths among veterans

NIH 2016 $240,499 University of Pennsylvania To develop implementation strategies for firearmrelated suicide prevention in pediatric primary 

care
Appendix III: Federal Efforts to Promote 

Firearm Safety

Page 42 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Table 2: Federal Programs for Firearm Safety

Agency Program type Summary

Department of Justice

ATF safety materials Publishes materials on firearm safety and documenting transfer of 

firearms between private individuals

FBI National Instant Criminal 

Background Check System 

Has been used since 1998 to determine if a prospective buyer is eligible 

to purchase a firearm

NIJ technology challenge The Gun Safety Technology Challenge began in 2015 and was 

suspended in 2016 

Department of Veterans Affairs 

VHA lock distribution Distributed more than 2 million gun locks at VA facilities 

VHA counseling Piloted lethal means counseling training for VA providers at the San 

Francisco VA

VHA safety materials Publishes gun safe storage materials

VHA research Conducted research on firearm safety and suicide risk in 2012

Sources: Data and interviews with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF); Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA); Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); National Institute of Justice 

(NIJ); and Veterans Health Administration (VHA) | GAO-17-665
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 43 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Marcia Crosse, (202) 512-7114, crossem@gao.gov

In addition to the individual named above, other key contributors to this 

report were Geri Redican-Bigott (Assistant Director), JoAnn MartinezShriver (Analyst-in-Charge), Alexander Cattran, and Kelsey Wilson. Also 

contributing were Sam Amrhein, Rebecca Hendrickson, Jenny Rudisill, 

and Emily Wilson.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments
Bibliography

Page 44 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Albright, T.L. and S.K. Burge, “Improving Firearm Storage Habits: Impact 

of Brief Office Counseling by Family Physicians,” Journal of the American 

Board of Family Practice, vol. 16, no. 1 (2003).

Azrael, D., L. Hepburn, D. Hemenway, and M. Miller, “The Stock and 

Flow of US Firearms: Results from the 2015 National Firearms Survey,”

The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. 

Forthcoming.

Barber, C. and D. Hemenway, “Too Many or Too Few Unintentional 

Firearm Deaths in Official U.S. Mortality Data?” Accident Analysis and 

Prevention, vol. 43, issue 3 (2011).

Barkin, S. L., et al., “Is Office-Based Counseling about Media Use, 

Timeouts, and Firearm Storage Effective? Results from a ClusterRandomized, Controlled Trial,” Pediatrics, vol. 122, no. 1 (2008).

Brent D.A., et al., “Compliance With Recommendations to Remove 

Firearms in Families Participating in a Clinical Trial for Adolescent 

Depression,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent 

Psychiatry, vol. 39, no. 10 (2000).

Carbone, P.S., C.J. Clemens, and T.M. Ball, “Effectiveness of Gun-safety 

Counseling and a Gun Lock Giveaway in a Hispanic Community,”

Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, vol. 159, (2005).

Coyne-Beasley, T., V.J. Schoenbach, and R.M. Johnson, “Love Our Kids, 

Lock Your Guns: A Community-based Firearm Safety Counseling and 

Gun Lock Distribution Program,” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent 

Medicine, vol. 155, no. 659-664 (2001).

Fowler, K.A., L.L. Dahlberg, T. Haileyesus, and J.L. Annest, “Firearm 

Injuries in the United States” Preventive Medicine, vol. 79 (2015).

Grossman, D. C., et al., “Firearm Safety Counseling in Primary Care 

Pediatrics: A Randomized, Controlled Trial,” Pediatrics, vol. 106, no. 1 

(2000).

Grossman, D. C., et al., “Gun Storage Practices and Risk of Youth 

Suicide and Unintentional Firearm Injuries,” Journal of the American 

Medical Association, vol. 293, no. 6 (2005).

Bibliography
Bibliography

Page 45 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Grossman, D. C., et al., “Improving Firearm Storage in Alaska Native 

Villages: A Randomized Trial of Household Gun Cabinets,” American 

Journal of Public Health, vol. 102, no. S2 (2012).

Hardy, M.S., et al., “A Firearm Safety Program for Children: They Just 

Can’t Say No,” Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, vol. 17, no. 4 

(1996).

Hardy, M.S., “Teaching Firearm Safety to Children: Failure of a Program,”

Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, vol. 23, no. 2 (2002).

Himle, M.B., et al., “An Evaluation of Two Procedures for Training Skills to 

Prevent Gun Play in Children,” Pediatrics, vol. 113, no. 1, (2004).

Horn, A., et al. “Community Based Program to Improve Firearm Practices 

in Rural Alaska,” Injury Prevention, vol. 9, no. 231-234, (2003).

Johnson, R.M., J. Lintz, D. Gross, M. Miller, and D. Hemenway. 

“Evaluation of the ASK Campaign in Two Midwestern Cities,” International 

Scholarly Research Network, (2012).

Kruesi, M.J.P. et al., “Suicide and Violence Prevention: Parent Education 

in the Emergency Department,” Journal of the American Academy of 

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 38, no. 3 (1999).

Miller, M. “One Third of Households in the USA Own Firearms which Are 

Often Stored Unsafely,” Evidence-Based Healthcare & Public Health, vol. 

9 (2005).

Miltenberger, R. et al., “Evaluating Behavioral Skills Training with and 

without Simulated In Situ Training for Teaching Safety Skills to Children,”

Education and Treatment of Children, vol. 32, no. 1 (2009).

Oatis, P.J., et al., “Pediatric Practice Based Evaluation of the Steps to 

Prevent Firearm Injury Program,” Injury Prevention, vol. 5, no. 48-52 

(1999).

Okoro, C.A., et al., “Prevalence of Household Firearms and FirearmStorage Practices in the 50 States and the District of Columbia: Findings 

from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2002,” Pediatrics, 

vol. 116, no. 3 (2005).
Bibliography

Page 46 GAO-17-665 Safe Firearm Storage

Rowhani-Rahbar, A., J. A. Simonetti, and F. P. Rivara, “Effectiveness of 

Interventions to Promote Safe Firearm Storage,” Epidemiologic Reviews, 

vol. 38 (2016).

Runyan, C.W., et al., “Lethal Means Counseling for Parents of Youth 

Seeking Emergency Care for Suicidality,” Western Journal of Emergency 

Medicine, vol. 17, no. 1, (2016).

Shenassa, E. D. et al., “Safer Storage of Firearms at Home and Risk of 

Suicide: A Study of Protective Factors in a Nationally Representative 

Sample,” Journal of Epidemiological Community Health, vol. 58 (2004).

Simonetti, J. A., et al., “Evaluation of a community-based safe firearm and 

ammunition storage intervention.” Injury Prevention, June 22 2017, 

accessed July 18, 2017. 

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/early/2017/06/22/injuryprev-2016-

042292.

Stark, D.E., and N.H. Shah, “Funding and Publication of Research on 

Gun Violence and Other Leading Causes of Death,” Journal of the 

American Medical Association, vol. 317, no. 1 (2017).

Stevens, M.M., et al., “A Pediatric, Practice-based, Randomized Trial of 

Drinking and Smoking Prevention and Bicycle Helmet, Gun, and Seatbelt 

Safety Promotion,” Pediatrics, vol. 109, no. 3, (2002).

Wiebe, D. J. “Homicide and Suicide Risks Associated with Firearms in the 

Home: A National Case-Control Study,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, 

vol. 41, no. 6, 2003.

(100898)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to http://www.gao.gov

and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering 

information is posted on GAO’s website, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, LinkedIn, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov and read The Watchblog.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.