Summary
A UK charity report on how Auracast could serve people who are deaf or have hearing loss, worked through six use cases, with recommendations for manufacturers, platform developers, the NHS, audiologists, venues and transport operators.
Key findings
- The public transport Unknowns passage proposes comparing streamed announcements with sound received by hearing-device microphones, so an inaudible-in-the-room stream could trigger a warning or be ignored. This is a suggested response to spoofing, not a tested or required product feature.
- The Making Auracast accessible discussion (printed pages 16–17) calls for usability tests under real-world conditions and asks hearing-device makers to consider people without smartphones. The following Auracast in practice recommendations ask national infrastructure providers and venues to participate in pilot tests involving end users; the National infrastructure recommendations also call for testing Auracast with user groups.
- Expects the full rollout of Auracast to take up to 10 years, and asks venues with a hearing loop to keep testing and maintaining it for at least the next five years and potentially nearer 10.
- Recommends that new buildings install a hearing loop where feasible as well as an Auracast system. Where loops are impractical, it sees Auracast as a better choice than infrared or Wi-Fi because people will in time be able to use their own receivers.
- Notes that the Auracast specification sets interoperability but not the user interface. It warns that phone-based stream selection and password-protected streams risk excluding some people, and describes QR-code, NFC and on-device alternatives.
- The Introduction (page 3) describes Auracast’s potential to improve access while calling for inclusive design. Making Auracast accessible for everyone (page 13) says user-interface choices are left to product developers and warns of exclusion through inaccessible designs.
- Inclusive design and including users (page 16) recommends involving people who might otherwise be excluded, testing device usability under real-world conditions, and considering people without smartphones. Its recommendation to venues and national infrastructure is to participate in pilot tests involving end users.
- At a reception desk, it finds that a well-maintained hearing loop still gives people without a smartphone a simpler experience than an encrypted Auracast stream, and asks that hearing aids keep telecoils and desks keep loops until Auracast is equally simple.
- The Reception desk passage (page 28) contrasts a loop’s limited coverage and one-button access with the extra interaction needed to join an encrypted stream, such as scanning a QR code. The user-needs questions (page 32) say that brief interactions may reduce tolerance for difficulty joining a stream.
- For public transport it flags two untested risks: spoofed streams that mimic official announcements, and congestion when thousands of devices share the 2.4 GHz band. It says practical tests are needed.
- Cites a 2022 UK market survey in which only 15% of hearing aid users knew they had a telecoil, and notes that NHS hearing aids are usually replaced every three to four years.
- Printed pages 36 and 41 ask audiologists to help people set up prescription hearing devices for Auracast or signpost to suitably trained, accessible services. Page 41 also asks for telecoil activation to support the indirect route through a neckloop receiver.
- In its television use case (printed page 21), RNID notes that listeners may want to converse with other people while streaming television audio and proposes intuitive user control of the balance between Auracast and hearing aid microphone signals. This is a design recommendation, not a measured venue fitting target.
Limits
A policy and design report with user quotes, not measurements. UK-focused (NHS supply, UK transport). Written in February 2025, when it expected operating-system support for Auracast on phones during 2025/26.
Read the original
rnid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Final-Auracast-Report-110225.pdf
Cited in
- Auracast, hearing loop, infrared, RF or Wi-Fi: which suits which room?Disputed
- How much do crowds, phones and Wi-Fi reduce reliability?Open
- Will equipment bought today meet the standards that follow?Open
- How do listeners find and join the right broadcast?Open
- Open or protected: when should a venue broadcast need a code?Open
- Can Auracast serve ticket windows, service counters and reception desks?Open
- How many listeners carry a telecoil, an Auracast-capable device or a smartphone?Disputed
- What do listeners prefer, and how often do they use venue systems?Partly answered
- How is an installed hearing loop checked against IEC 60118-4, and how often does it pass?Partly answered
- Where do hearing loops fall short: metal, spill, noise and upkeep?Partly answered
- Where does infrared assistive listening work, and where does it fall short?Partly answered
- Should a venue keep its hearing loop when it adds Auracast, and can one system serve both?Partly answered
- What does each system cost to install and to run over its life?Open
- What works for announcements and ticket counters on buses, trains, stations and airports?Partly answered
- What works in courtrooms, council chambers and other meeting rooms where speech must be heard by all and kept in the room?Partly answered
- What works in hospitals, clinics and pharmacies, where a misheard word can matter most?Partly answered
- What does a listener have to do to use each system, and where do people get stuck?Partly answered
- Are hearing aids set up well enough to use Auracast in venues?Partly answered
- Can venue broadcasts be spoofed, hijacked or jammed, and what protects them?Partly answered
- What does Auracast qualification and the Auracast logo cover, and what does it leave out?Partly answered
Cite this source
RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People). Auracast: a revolution in audio accessibility (RNID Auracast report). RNID. 11 February 2025. https://rnid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Final-Auracast-Report-110225.pdf (accessed 13 October 2026).
Every finding here cites its source, and who funded each source is labelled. This site does not recommend products. Found an error or a missing study? Suggest a correction.