For decades, the federal government has overseen two key vaccine injury compensation programs: the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) and the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). The VICP and CICP are designed to help maintain vaccine access while also recognizing that vaccine injuries can occur and those affected by such injuries should be compensated. However, over time, the demands on, and challenges faced by, these programs have grown. Recently, they have become targets of criticism from members of the Trump administration, including the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ,who said (without evidence) in 2025 that VICP had “devolved into a morass of inefficiency, favoritism, and outright corruption” and that he would lead an effort to overhaul it. Some lawmakers and external groups have called to replace or end these programs while others have suggested keeping them intact but adopting policy changes that could help modernize them and make them more effective. Some have raised concerns that making drastic changes to vaccine injury compensation programs could undermine the U.S. vaccine market and, more generally, confidence in vaccines.
To provide background and context on this topic, this brief summarizes the history and rationale for these programs and their key elements, analyzes publicly available information on claims and compensation under the programs, and discusses key policy issues they currently face. The programs, while both having been created as alternatives to civil courts, vary significantly in their structures, processed, vaccines covered, and compensation rates and amounts, among other factors.
About the Author
