Last October, a mom named Rachel in Raleigh, NC sat at her kitchen table with two iPads side by side, LAMP Words for Life open on one, Proloquo2Go on the other. Her four-year-old, Marcus, had just been evaluated for AAC by a private SLP. "She told me either one could work," Rachel said, "but that they'd work for different reasons. I spent $550 buying both before I understood what she meant." Six weeks later, after trials with both, Marcus's therapist recommended LAMP. He'd taken to the fixed button locations like a kid memorizing a piano piece. Rachel donated the Proloquo license to another family at the clinic.
That story captures the whole tension of this decision. Both apps are excellent, both are evidence-informed, but they're built on fundamentally different philosophies. The right pick depends on your kid's specific motor and cognitive profile, not on which one has better reviews in the App Store. Everything below assumes you're working with a clinician, since AAC selection is a clinical decision. And worth saying up front: LittleWords is a speech-practice companion, not an AAC system, and it's not a substitute for LAMP, Proloquo2Go, or any other AAC.
Two philosophies, one goal
LAMP (Language Acquisition through Motor Planning) was developed by SLP John Halloran and is rooted in motor learning research. The core idea is that consistent motor patterns help the brain learn language the same way consistent motor patterns help the brain learn to tie shoes or ride a bike. In LAMP Words for Life (the iPad app, roughly $300 one-time, developed by Prentke Romich Company), every word lives in the same spot on the screen, always. The button for "more" is in the same location whether your child is at the 1-hit, 2-hit, or full vocabulary level. The child builds muscle memory for language.
Proloquo2Go, developed by AssistiveWare, takes a different bet. It uses the Crescendo vocabulary, which scales from 14 core words up to thousands, organized by linguistic category and frequency. Words can be navigated through folders or accessed directly, and customization is extensive: words can be added, hidden, rearranged, reorganized entirely. It runs roughly $250 one-time on the App Store.
Think of it this way: LAMP is a QWERTY keyboard. You learn where every letter lives, and eventually your fingers know the way without your eyes. Proloquo is more like a smartphone home screen you can rearrange, where the layout adapts to how you actually use the thing.
Here's the real tradeoff: consistency and flexibility are genuinely in tension. LAMP's fixed layout means the motor system can automate communication over time, but it also means you can't easily reorganize words to match a specific context, a field trip, a holiday, a new obsession with trains. The structure is the point. Proloquo's flexibility means the vocabulary can be tailored to fit your child's world in fine detail, but every customization potentially disrupts spatial memory, so the child may need to visually scan for words rather than reaching for them automatically. Both are real strengths. Neither is a flaw. They just serve different kids.
Which kids tend to thrive with which
LAMP tends to click for a few kinds of kids. Ones with strong motor learning, who pick up physical skills quickly even when speech itself is hard, get a channel for that strength: once a word location is learned, it sticks. Kids with apraxia or motor speech challenges often do well too, on the logic that if the mouth struggles to plan speech movements, the hands may be a more reliable motor system, and LAMP gives the hands a consistent map. Some autistic children genuinely relax when things don't move, and the predictability of buttons staying put reduces cognitive load and supports independent use. And if your therapist or school team already knows LAMP, that matters more than most parents realize. Community support around a system is half the battle. Proloquo tends to suit a different set of kids. A child who can scan a busy screen and pick out what they want often does well with its flexible layout. It also handles heavy customization well, for specific interests, family members with unusual names, bilingual households, complex daily routines. Multilingual families in particular benefit from Proloquo2Go's strong multilingual support. Older kids moving toward literacy get solid literacy supports alongside AAC use. And since Proloquo doesn't require a dedicated device ecosystem, families who already own an iPad have a lower barrier to entry.
Modeling is the whole game
I'll be blunt, because it's the single most important thing here: the app you choose matters less than whether the adults around your child use it. Aided language stimulation (ALS) is the practice of modeling on the device, where the adult taps the words while saying them aloud, in real conversations, throughout the day. ALS is what teaches the child how the system works. Without it, even the perfect app sits unused.
LAMP's fixed motor patterns make modeling predictable: your hand goes to the same place every time you model "want" or "go" or "more," and some adults find this easier to internalize. Proloquo's flexibility means modeling can adapt mid-conversation, which some adults find more natural after an initial learning curve. Either way, you (and grandparents, and teachers, and siblings) need to learn to model on the device, every day, in real contexts, multiple times per interaction. This is the work.
AAC failures are almost always failures of modeling, not failures of system choice. The "wrong" system with extensive modeling produces better outcomes than the "right" system gathering dust on a shelf. If you can only invest energy in one thing, invest in modeling. AssistiveWare has free modeling guides on their site worth bookmarking.
Cost, funding, and the dedicated device question
Both apps land around $250 to $300 one-time, and both can be funded through insurance or Medicaid as speech-generating devices when paired with a dedicated iPad and proper SLP documentation. The funding process is similar for both, so don't let price drive the decision: they're essentially the same cost.
On dedicated devices versus personal iPads: PRC sells dedicated hardware that runs LAMP. AssistiveWare doesn't sell devices, but Proloquo2Go can be installed on an iPad locked to the AAC app using Guided Access. For some kids, a dedicated device is the right call (fewer distractions, a clearer signal that "this is my voice"). For others, a personal iPad works fine. An SLP can help you figure out which.
Other systems worth knowing
LAMP and Proloquo get most of the attention, but they're not the only options. TouchChat with WordPower uses a word-based, more text-oriented vocabulary, often a good fit for older kids transitioning to literacy. CoughDrop is web-based, cross-platform, and subscription-priced, a more affordable entry point that supports multiple vocabulary systems including LAMP and PODD layouts. PODD (Pragmatic Organization Dynamic Display) is a specific vocabulary system that runs on multiple apps and has a strong evidence base for complex communicators. Snap Core First, Tobii Dynavox's system, offers pre-made boards with flexible layouts. The choice space is wide, and an AAC-trained SLP can help you navigate it.
Where LittleWords fits, and doesn't
LittleWords is a speech-practice companion your child interacts with for short sessions focused on emerging verbal speech, not an AAC system. A child using LAMP or Proloquo can also use LittleWords as a supplemental tool: they serve different functions entirely and don't compete. It's a bit like the difference between a wheelchair (mobility, independence, essential) and physical therapy (building strength, a separate goal). One doesn't replace the other.
Getting the right evaluation
For this decision, you need an AAC-trained SLP, and not all SLPs are one. Ask specifically, and if your current therapist isn't AAC-trained, ask for a referral. In the US, AAC evaluations can come through early intervention, school IEPs, or private practice. Insurance often covers the evaluation, and Medicaid frequently covers both the evaluation and the device. The process takes patience, but the funding pathways exist.
My honest opinion: the biggest mistake families make isn't picking the wrong app, it's skipping the formal evaluation and choosing based on a Facebook recommendation. Get the assessment and let the data point you somewhere.
There's no universal winner between LAMP and Proloquo: the right choice depends on your child's motor, cognitive, and sensory profile, and that's a call an AAC-trained SLP should make based on real assessment, not brand loyalty.
Switching from one to the other later is possible, but it's a real transition, not a quick tweak. The motor patterns of LAMP and the navigation patterns of Proloquo differ enough that changing systems means relearning a lot from scratch, which is why it's worth the effort to get the match right the first time.
Most schools support both systems, though some lean toward one or have stronger in-house expertise with a particular platform. Check with your school's AAC specialist before you buy anything.
Using LAMP or Proloquo won't stop your child from talking. AAC doesn't delay verbal speech and often helps it along. Some kids develop spoken language alongside their device, while others rely on AAC as their main way of communicating for the long haul. Both are fine outcomes.
Whether to go with a dedicated device or a personal iPad comes down to your child and your household. A dedicated device cuts down on distractions; an iPad is cheaper up front and more flexible. Your SLP can help you sort out which tradeoffs matter most for your family.
Don't expect fast results. It usually takes weeks to months of consistent modeling before a child starts using the system on their own, and that's completely normal: AAC language acquisition follows roughly the same pattern as spoken language, with a lot of input before you see any output.
If you want to trial both before buying, some clinics and lending libraries offer trial periods, so it's worth asking your SLP or checking your state's assistive technology program. Buying both outright, the way Rachel did, works if you can swing it financially, but most families can't, and a solid evaluation up front should make that unnecessary anyway.
For more on this topic, see the AAC for autism hub, the pillar guide on speech therapy at home for autistic kids, our comparison of PECS vs Proloquo, and our piece on AAC for toddlers. You might also find our speech app reviews and comparisons useful, along with related guides on 504 plans vs IEPs for speech delay, apraxia of speech vs phonological disorder, whether speech therapy apps are worth it, our Articulation Station review, autism meltdowns vs tantrums, our roundup of the best speech therapy apps for autistic kids in 2026 (also covered here), and how speech delay and autism differ by gender.