Securitas Healthcare: independent supplier assessment.
Securitas Healthcare (formerly Stanley Healthcare, originally AeroScout) Is one of the largest healthcare RTLS suppliers. This is TRACIO's independent assessment: where they remain the safe choice and where modern alternatives compete.
Independent brief: we do not resell this supplier. How we assess suppliers.
Who they are
The business originated as AeroScout (Wi-Fi RTLS pioneer), was acquired by Stanley Black & Decker (forming Stanley Healthcare), and was divested to Securitas in 2022.
Portfolio covers hospital asset tracking, staff duress, infant protection (the long-standing Hugs system), patient flow, temperature monitoring and hand-hygiene compliance. Deeply embedded in many large US and EMEA hospitals.
Comparing this supplier with others? See independent supplier selection.
Where they're strongest
Long deployment-base in US healthcare: many of the largest US health systems have Stanley Healthcare/Securitas infrastructure already installed. Infant protection (Hugs) is a category-defining product with regulatory acceptance.
Hand-hygiene compliance has mature workflow integration. For health systems renewing or expanding existing AeroScout-era infrastructure, Securitas is the structural incumbent.
Where they're not the right answer
Wi-Fi-based RTLS accuracy (room-level) is limiting for use cases that need bed-level or sub-metre precision. Newer BLE-AoA (Quuppa partners) or UWB systems outperform.
Modern UX is less polished than recent entrants like Kontakt.io. Pricing reflects established-supplier overhead. For new hospital projects without existing AeroScout investment, the case is less obvious.
How they compare
Versus CenTrak: head-to-head US healthcare RTLS competitor; both have deep US references; CenTrak originally IR-based, now hybrid.
Versus Kontakt.io: Kontakt.io is more modern architecturally, more cost-competitive, BLE-led. Versus AiRISTA Flow: smaller competitor with hybrid Wi-Fi + BLE approach.
Positioning and tech stack
From a buyer’s architecture view, separate silicon or vehicle hardware from platform software, from workflow applications, from integrator delivery. Conflating those layers is how RFPs ask one supplier to be four things and then punish them for gaps that belong elsewhere in the BOM. Public product materials should be read as capability claims to validate on your floor, not as acceptance certificates.
TRACIO maps this supplier into the correct layer for your programme and scores it against alternatives in the same layer. We don't sell hardware, so our advice stays independent. Assessments stay independent of channel incentives.
Where it fits
Fit improves when your accuracy or throughput SLO, integration surface and support geography line up with the supplier’s centre of gravity. Ask for references that match your industry, site scale and radio or vehicle class. A glossy logo slide from an adjacent vertical is weak evidence. Pilot on the real process with production interference present.
Also confirm whether success depends on a partner SI. Many credible platforms ship through channels; that is fine if the partner is named, contracted and measured against the same accuracy gate as the OEM.
Where it does not fit
Wi-Fi-based RTLS accuracy (room-level) is limiting for use cases that need bed-level or sub-metre precision. Newer BLE-AoA (Quuppa partners) or UWB systems outperform. Modern UX is less polished than recent entrants like Kontakt.io.
Walk away or dual-source when your SLO sits outside the proven accuracy band, when procurement origin or risk policy blocks the supplier, when services bench is thin in your region, or when the commercial model forces platform modules you will never operationalise. An accurate “not fit” early is cheaper than a stalled pilot.
Alternatives to shortlist
Keep at least one alternative in the same layer through design review so pricing and roadmap pressure stay real. For hybrid programmes, expect complementary suppliers across layers (for example RAIN identity at docks plus UWB on vehicles, or Wi-Fi analytics plus BLE-AoA in precision zones). See our comparisons for head-to-heads that match common shortlists.
Procurement notes
Write accuracy or performance SLOs per zone before you request quotes. Require independent RF or site-design review rights, a live acceptance test method, tag or robot battery and refresh assumptions, integration scope into MES/WMS/EMR, and a five-year TCO workbook that separates hardware, licences, install PMO and application work. Ban vanity metrics that only appear in empty-lab demos.
Commercial diligence should cover support hours for your geographies, spare-parts lead times, firmware cadence, data residency, exit clauses for raw data access, and whether professional services are OEM or partner delivered. TRACIO helps you choose AGVs and AMRs and plan fleet management; we do not sell robots.
If this supplier clears the gate on your constraints, we will say so. If another clears it cheaper at equal SLO, we will say that too. Independence is the product.
Frequently asked questions
Are existing AeroScout deployments still supported?
Yes, Securitas continues supporting the install base, with migration paths to newer architectures. Verify specific product-line roadmap during supplier scrutiny.
Is Hugs (infant protection) the only credible option?
It's the dominant product with the broadest regulatory acceptance, but alternatives exist (Cognosos, others). For greenfield, evaluate; for replacement, the switching cost is non-trivial.
How does Securitas compare to dedicated tracking suppliers like Quuppa partners?
For sub-metre accuracy use cases (workflow analytics, infant protection bed-level), Quuppa-based systems often outperform. For broad hospital asset visibility at room level, both are viable.
Should we extend our Stanley/AeroScout deployment or migrate?
Depends on use-case needs. We assess existing infrastructure ROI vs replacement cost and target-state accuracy requirements. Programme rescue is the relevant service.
Last updated: