Physical Security: The ROI of Bullet-Resistant Retrofits

Learn how upgrading with bullet-resistant products protects people, assets, and long-term profitability.

In today’s environment, organizations must assess physical security not only as a cost center but as a strategic investment. Upgrading facility entryways, transaction counters, glazing, and partitions with bullet-resistant materials can deliver a measurable return.

This kind of retrofit protects people and assets while reducing liability and enhancing resilience. Investing in bullet-resistant products is a cost-effective way to mitigate risks and protect operations, maximizing physical security ROI.

This article explores how decision-makers evaluate returns, review the threat landscape, and identify key cost drivers. It also covers compliance and specification guidance while providing real-world ROI scenarios that demonstrate why bullet-resistant retrofits belong in the business case.

Why ROI Belongs in a Physical Security Conversation

Traditionally, physical security measures were budgeted as fixed costs: protection against theft, damage, or intrusion. Yet, modern thought leadership urges organizations to adopt a Return on Security Investment (ROSI) mindset.

Rather than simply asking “What does this cost?”, savvy decision-makers—especially CFOs and risk managers—ask “What losses does this prevent?” and “How does this contribute to business continuity and profitability?”

• Physical security ROI translates security expenditures into avoided losses, downtime minimization, and risk mitigation.
• Decision-makers increasingly evaluate security projects by avoiding liability, insurance premium reduction, and asset protection rather than just by hard cost.
• By framing retrofits of bullet-resistant systems as investments, organizations can shift security from an expense to a strategic asset.

Because the business case must align with financial metrics, retrofits that protect people, reduce risk exposure, and preserve operations become compelling. When security is quantified in this way, the conversation moves from “cost‐only” to “value‐driven.”

The Threat Landscape and Cost Drivers for Businesses

Organizations face evolving physical security threats that entail both direct and indirect costs.

Threats:

• Workplace violence, including assaults, threats and active-shooter incidents, pose real risk. For example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) identified 24 active-shooter incidents in the U.S. in 2024 — half the number reported in 2023.
• Robbery, smash-and-grab, and organized retail crime continue to challenge retail-oriented facilities.
• High-value transaction environments (banks, pharmacies, quick-service restaurants) are perennial targets for armed theft.

These threats translate into measurable business costs:

• Direct costs — property damage, theft, downtime, building repairs, temporary relocation, or remediation.
• Indirect costs — litigation from injury or death, liability claims, reputational damage, employee turnover, insurance premium increases.
• Operational continuity — disruption to business operations, lost revenue during shutdowns, increased security staffing costs.

By linking these cost drivers back to security investments, organizations can evaluate how bullet-resistant retrofits contribute to reducing those exposures.

Compliance and Duty of Care

Beyond loss prevention, organizations have legal and regulatory obligations that elevate the business case for physical protection. Under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) General Duty Clause, employers must provide workplaces free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious physical harm.

Negligent-security lawsuits increasingly hold organizations accountable when protective measures prove inadequate.

A robust risk-assessment process, documented mitigation strategy and physical protections (such as bullet-resistant systems) help satisfy “reasonable” protective measures.

When a facility can demonstrate engineering controls, administrative controls and training all work together, it strengthens compliance and reduces liability.

Engineering controls such as bullet-resistant glazing become part of that documented portfolio.

In short, installing bullet-resistant retrofits is not just about protection—it supports legal defensibility and organizational duty of care.

How to Spec Bullet-Resistant Systems

Selecting the right bullet-resistant system requires understanding specification language, standards, and threat profiling.

Key standards:

• The UL 752 (“Standard for Bullet-Resisting Equipment”) is widely used in North America to assess windows, doors, and barriers’ ballistic resistance.
• The NIJ 01 ballistic standard addresses personal body armor, but many specifiers reference both NIJ and UL standards for building components.

Specifying protections:

• Determine threat profile: What caliber, what weapon type, what number of rounds? Refer to UL 752 level tables to determine the required protection.
• Use CSI 3-Part Specifications to integrate into architectural documents. Use resources such as ARCAT and SpecLink to obtain accurate templates and performance criteria.
• Consider retrofit conditions: glazing replacement vs. full frame replacement; fit-back to existing hardware; aesthetic and occupant visibility requirements.

By aligning the threat profile to the UL standard level, architects and facility managers can select the most appropriate system. This avoids over-specifying (which adds unnecessary cost) and under-specifying (which compromises protection).

Building the Business Case: Costs vs. Avoided Losses

To present a credible business case, organizations must compare total cost of ownership to quantified avoided losses.

Cost components:

• Capital expenditure (CapEx): purchase and installation of bullet-resistant systems.
• Operating expenditure (OpEx): maintenance, inspection, eventual replacement or refurbishment.
• Expected lifespan: many bullet-resistant systems are designed for decades of service, reducing refurbishment frequency.

Avoided losses:

• Property damage prevented in a ballistic event (glass shattering, structural damage, repair costs).
• Operational downtime avoided: facility remains open, revenue uninterrupted.
• Liability and insurance costs reduced: lower risk profile may reduce premiums or the cost of potential litigation.
• Preservation of human life and brand value: while harder to quantify, employee safety and customer trust translate to retention and brand resilience.

When these avoided costs are monetized and compared to the cost base, the result is a tangible physical security ROI. This approach elevates the retrofit from expense to strategic investment.

Seeing Security Differently: How Avoided Losses Translate into Real ROI

Example 1: Retail Environment — Reducing Losses from Repeated Threats

A mid-size quick-service restaurant in a high-theft metropolitan area experiences frequent armed hold-up attempts. The cost of a single event (loss of inventory, damage to premises, temporary closure, and board-up) runs $100,000.

Installing a UL 752 Level 3 bullet-resistant counter and glazing system costs $150,000 with a 20-year lifespan. Over 20 years, if one incident occurs every five years, the avoided losses could total $400,000.

Example 2: Government or Military Facility — Mitigating High-Impact, Low-Frequency Risks

A municipal building employs public-facing service counters. A high-severity but low-frequency threat (active shooter) exists.

The cost of downtime, reputational impact, and potential litigation might exceed $1 million in a worst-case event. A $300,000 bullet-resistant retrofit amortized over its lifespan becomes justifiable—even if the incident risk is low.

Each example demonstrates that while the probability of an event may vary, the magnitude of potential losses justifies investment. By shifting the lens to the losses avoided, the physical security ROI becomes measurable.

Where Physical Security Delivers the Strongest ROI

Bullet-resistant retrofits offer particularly strong ROI in certain industry sectors:

• Retail and quick-service restaurants: combating organized retail crime, armed robbery, and drive-up theft provides a clear cost-avoidance path.
• Banks and pharmacies: high-value assets and cash transactions make them inherently higher risk.
• Government and courthouses: continuity of service, public safety mission and liability avoidance make investment logical.
• Healthcare facilities: emergency departments and entry points face workplace violence; retrofits protect staff and patients and support risk-reduction programs.
• Houses of worship and nonprofit organizations: many can leverage the FEMA Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP) and other funding pathways for capital support in protective hardening projects.

Each sector has unique cost drivers and threat profiles. By tailoring the retrofit to the sector, the physical security ROI can be maximized.

Grants, Funding, and Budgeting Pathways

Capital cost is often cited as a barrier to bullet-resistant upgrades. However, many organizations can offset that barrier through grants and alternative funding.

The FEMA NSGP supports nonprofit organizations in high-risk areas. By linking retrofit projects to a documented risk assessment and broader hardening strategy, groups can increase their chances of funding. Organizations should:

• Align the retrofit project with grant criteria (risk assessment, mission-critical continuity).
• Phase the project across fiscal years to spread budget impact and align with budget cycles.
• Engage insurers and risk managers early to show how reduced risk may translate into lower premiums or improved terms.

This approach helps secure financing and align budgeting of bullet-resistant retrofits as part of an overall physical security investment strategy.

Ballistic Protection in a Layered Security Program

Bullet-resistant glazing and protective systems are one layer in a comprehensive security design. A layered security strategy might include:

• Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) principles
• Access control systems and visitor management
• Video surveillance and intrusion alarms
• Employee training and policy enforcement
• Bullet-resistant barriers and glazing to stop a threat before it enters the space

Cameras and access control may detect or delay an intruder, but only physical barriers can stop or slow the threat. Integrating bullet-resistant retrofits enhances security performance and strengthens the business case for physical security ROI.

Measuring Results and Sustaining the Business Case

To maintain and measure physical security ROI, organizations should track key performance indicators (KPIs) such as:

• Number of attempted versus successful breaches or attacks
• Downtime hours and lost revenue from incidents
• Number of injury claims or lawsuits related to security events
• Insurance premium changes and claims frequency
• Employee turnover and absenteeism related to safety concerns

By implementing dashboards and periodic reporting, security- and risk-leaders can quantify the benefits from the retrofit investment.

Documenting performance supports renewal, budget requests and demonstrates that the retrofit remains a strategic investment—not a sunk cost.

Addressing Common Objections

“Bullet-resistant systems are too expensive.”

When compared to potential losses, downtime and liability, the cost becomes justified through avoidance.

“They look fortress-like and will alienate customers.”

Modern systems are designed to blend into aesthetics, preserve transparency and integrate seamlessly with architectural interiors. This fulfills the requirement for unobtrusive protection.

“We already have guards and cameras.”

Those measures are important, but they respond after the fact. Bullet-resistant retrofits prevent the threat from reaching its target in the first place. Guards and cameras should complement—not substitute—barriers.

By addressing these objections with fact-based ROI calculations, it becomes clear that bullet-resistant retrofits are not redundant. They fill a critical gap.

Practical Next Steps

Turning a strong business case into an actionable plan requires structure and alignment across departments. The path from recognizing risk to implementing bullet-resistant retrofits involves coordinated effort between facilities, finance, security, and executive leadership.

Starting with clear threat awareness and using standardized specification tools ensures investments provide protection and a measurable return.

The following steps outline how organizations can move from concept to implementation while maintaining focus on physical security ROI.

• Commission a formal risk assessment of the facility and identify high-risk locations.
• Map potential threat scenarios—prioritize based on cost impact and probability.
• Access specification resources via ARCAT, SpecLink, or manufacturer libraries and use CSI 3-Part documents to integrate bullet-resistant systems.
• Finance the project through phased budgeting or grant funding (e.g., FEMA NSGP).
• Engage insurers and risk managers early to discuss how the retrofit may impact premiums or liability exposure.
• Track KPIs post-installation and report annually to maintain the business case for physical security ROI.

By following these steps, organizations align tactical hardening projects with strategic investment frameworks.

From Cost Center to Competitive Advantage

In summary, the business case for bullet-resistant retrofits is strong. By shifting the conversation toward physical security ROI, organizations elevate protective measures from cost-centers to strategic investments.

Bullet-resistant systems safeguard employees, preserve assets, reduce liability, and support operational continuity. When integrated into a layered security program and backed by quantifiable savings, retrofit projects deliver clear value.

For decision-makers seeking to protect people, property, and profitability, investing in bullet-resistant retrofits is a wise business decision.

Schedule a consultation with Impact Security today to discuss retrofit options and cost-benefit modeling for your facility.

References and Further Reading

• Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Solutions. Testing and certification for bullet-resistant materials.
• Occupation Safety & Health Administration (OSHA). Workplace violence prevention.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Active Shooter Incidents in the United States, 2024.
• National Retail Federation (NRF). Retail Safety and Security Resources
• Ballistic Standards UL 752 & NIJ Ballistic Resistance Standards.
• ASIS Security Management. Standards & Guidelines

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP) Guidance and Fact Sheet.