Why feature lists don't help you choose
Line up the websites of any five UK lone worker apps and you'll read the same page five times: SOS button, GPS location, fall detection, 'peace of mind'. The features have converged; the brochures can't tell you which product fits your organisation. What still differs — sharply — is how each product handles the five things that decide whether the system works on the day it matters.
This guide is deliberately criteria-led rather than a brand-versus-brand table. Named comparisons go stale within a quarter and rarely match your risk profile anyway. Score the shortlist yourself, against your own risk assessment, using the five axes below — the answers will separate the options faster than any review site.
Criterion 1 — Check-in scheduling: rigid timer or real shift patterns?
Every app offers 'check-ins'. The differences are in the scheduling model. The most basic products offer a single countdown timer the worker sets manually each time — fine for a one-off site visit, hopeless for a care round with six calls a day, because a system that depends on the worker remembering to restart a timer fails exactly when they're busy or stressed.
Look for: check-in intervals that can be set per role or per task risk level rather than one global number; automatic prompts before the deadline rather than silent expiry; shift start and end confirmation as well as mid-shift check-ins; and what happens on the worker's side when signal drops — does the app queue the check-in and sync when coverage returns, or does a dead zone generate a false alarm (or worse, silently nothing)? Ask each vendor to demo a missed check-in end to end, not just show the settings screen.
Criterion 2 — Escalation: a defined sequence or a notification and a hope?
This is the axis where products differ most and demos reveal least. When a check-in is missed or an SOS fires, the weakest systems send one push notification to one supervisor and consider the job done. If that supervisor is driving, asleep or on leave, the alert dies in a pocket. The strongest systems run a time-boxed sequence: alert responder one by multiple channels, wait a defined number of minutes, move to responder two, keep going until a human acknowledges — with every step logged.
Questions that separate the field: how many escalation steps can you configure, and can they differ by team or risk level? Which channels does each step use — push only, or SMS, voice call and other channels for responders who don't live in the app? Can you run a test escalation without paging real emergency contacts? Vygard's answer, for transparency: escalation runs as a multi-step, multi-channel cascade (push, SMS, WhatsApp and voice) with configurable steps, and a test-SOS dry-run mode exists precisely so you can verify dispatch without alarming anyone. Whatever product you choose, insist on that test capability — an escalation path you've never fired is a hypothesis, not a control.
Criterion 3 — Monitoring model: who is actually watching?
Apps split into three monitoring models. Self-monitored: alerts go to your own managers or buddies — cheapest, and defensible for moderate risk if your people genuinely respond around the clock. ARC-monitored: alerts route to a professional alarm receiving centre staffed 24/7 — the model higher-risk roles and many contracts expect, and the route (via a BS 8484-certified service chain) to a graded police response. Hybrid: self-monitoring by default with ARC cover for defined roles or hours.
Be precise about certification when you compare. BS 8484 certifies a whole service chain — app or device, supplier processes and the ARC together — not an app in isolation, and vendors describe their status in importantly different ways. If a tender or your insurer requires BS 8484, ask every supplier directly for current certification evidence covering the specific service you'd buy, and verify rather than infer it from marketing copy. If your risk assessment supports self-monitoring instead, the honest questions become about your own escalation discipline: the app's job is then to make your internal response reliable, tested and evidenced.
Criterion 4 — Audit trail: can you prove what happened?
After an incident — or during a tender, an insurance review or an HSE conversation — the question is never 'did you have an app?' It's 'show us what happened'. Which check-ins fired, which were missed, when the alert went out, who was contacted on which channel, when a human acknowledged, how long the whole chain took. Products differ enormously here: some keep a full immutable event log for years, some keep a rolling few weeks of history, some log alerts but not the responses to them.
Compare retention periods against your own document-retention and contractual obligations, check whether the log records responder actions (not just alarms), and confirm you can export it. This is also where per-tier differences hide: it's common across the industry for cheaper tiers to keep shorter history — Vygard, for instance, retains 90 days of audit log on its entry plan and 365 days on Pro, with longer retention at enterprise level. Whoever you evaluate, find the retention number in writing before you rely on it.
Criterion 5 — Cost model: what does the second year cost?
Lone worker apps are almost universally priced per user per month in the UK, but the resemblance ends there. Compare on: what counts as a user (every licence, or only workers actually active — a real difference for seasonal and part-time workforces); whether supervisors and admins are billed; what's genuinely included versus add-on (ARC monitoring, SMS and voice alerts, integrations and sector features are common extras); contract length and exit terms; and whether there's a trial that exercises the real product rather than a sandbox.
Vygard publishes its pricing — from £9 per active worker per month, workers only counted when they clock on, no per-supervisor or per-admin fee, and a 14-day trial on every plan — and we'd suggest treating published, comparable pricing as a selection criterion in itself. A vendor who won't show a price list before a sales call is telling you something about year two.
Scoring it: a 20-minute exercise
Take your riskiest lone-working role and your most common one. For each shortlisted app, walk both roles through the five criteria and mark each red, amber or green — can the check-in schedule match this role's real pattern, does escalation reach a human who will act at the times this role works, is the monitoring model proportionate to this role's risk, would the audit trail satisfy the person who audits you, and does the cost model fit how this workforce actually flexes?
Ten marks per product, twenty minutes with the risk assessment open. It's unglamorous, but it converts 'they all look the same' into a defensible decision — and the same grid becomes the evidence for why you chose what you chose, which is exactly what an assessor will one day ask.
Frequently asked questions
- What should I look for when comparing lone worker apps in the UK?
- Five things separate products that look identical on paper: how flexibly check-ins can be scheduled against real shift patterns, whether escalation is a multi-step, multi-channel, time-boxed sequence you can test, whether monitoring is self-managed or routed to a 24/7 ARC, how long and how completely the audit trail is retained, and how the per-user cost model treats inactive workers, admins and add-ons.
- Are all lone worker apps basically the same?
- The headline features — SOS, GPS, fall detection, check-ins — have largely converged. The real differences are operational: what happens when a check-in is missed at 2am, whether an unacknowledged alert escalates automatically, and whether you can prove the whole chain worked afterwards. Demo those scenarios rather than comparing feature lists.
- Do I need an ARC-monitored app or is self-monitoring enough?
- It depends on risk and contracts, not preference. Self-monitoring can be defensible for moderate-risk roles where your own responders genuinely operate around the clock and the response is tested and logged. Higher-risk roles, poor-coverage lone work and many public-sector or framework contracts point to ARC monitoring through a BS 8484-certified service — if that's your requirement, ask any supplier for current certification evidence for the exact service you'd buy.
- How much does a lone worker app cost in the UK?
- UK lone worker apps are typically priced per user per month, with the market spanning single figures to several tens of pounds depending on monitoring and features. Compare what counts as a billable user, whether admins are charged, and what's an add-on. Vygard's published pricing starts at £9 per active worker per month with a 14-day trial.
Last updated 2026-07-27