Here are the APPIC match #'s:
APPIC MATCH NEWS 
--- 
2009 APPIC MATCH REPORT FROM THE APPIC BOARD OF DIRECTORS 
February 23, 2009 
We are pleased to report that 2,752 applicants were successfully  matched to internship positions.  A total of 45% of all applicants  who obtained a position matched to their first choice internship  program, approximately two-thirds (66%) received one of their top two  choices, and nearly four-in-five (78%) received one of their top  three choices. 
A total of 846 applicants were not matched to an internship position,  while 299 positions remained unfilled.  This is the highest number of  unmatched applicants to date, slightly exceeding the 842 unmatched  applicants from the 2007 APPIC Match. 
Compared to the 2008 APPIC Match, the number of registered applicants  increased by 66 (1.8%) to a record 3,825 applicants, while the number  of internship positions decreased by 7 (0.2%) to 3,051 positions.  It  should be noted that on September 30, 2008, initial 2009 Match  registration figures showed an encouraging increase of 243 registered  positions as compared to the same date in 2007.  However, this  increase was not sustained over time as the economic downturn  worsened in the months leading up to Match Day, resulting in  positions being removed from the Match due to a loss of (or  uncertainty regarding) funding. 
Here are the changes in numbers of applicants and positions as  compared to the 2008 APPIC Match: 
Applicants:  Registered for the Match...........+66 
                Withdrew or did not submit ranks................-40 
                Matched.................................................+3 
                Unmatched...........................................+103 
   Positions:   Offered in the Match....................-7 
                Filled......................................................+3 
                Unfilled...................................................-10 
Following is a seven year comparison of the 2002 and 2009 Match statistics: 
                              .............................2002.......2009.....7-YEAR CHANGE 
Participating Sites:.....610.........666..........+56  ( +9%) 
   Positions Offered:....2,752......3,051.........+299  (+11%) 
   Positions Filled:......          2,410......2,752.........+342  (+14%) 
   Positions Unfilled:.......342........299...........-43  (-13%) 
   Registered Applicants:...3,073...3,825......     +752  (+24%) 
   Withdrawn Applicants:.....        231.....227...........-4  ( -2%) 
   Matched Applicants:......2,410..2,752........+342  (+14%) 
   Unmatched Applicants:....        432.....846........+414  (+96%) 
INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS 
                        =================== 
PARTICIPATION 
------------- 
Training Sites Participating in the Match      666 
Programs Participating in the Match          1,146 
Positions Offered in the Match               3,051 
NOTE:  A "training site" can offer more than one "program" 
       in the Match.  Each "program" was identified in the 
       Match by a separate 6-digit code number. 
MATCH RESULTS 
------------- 
Positions:  Filled in the Match                  2,752  (90%) 
            Remaining Unfilled                     299  (10%) 
 
Programs:   Filled in the Match                    984  (86%) 
            With Unfilled Positions                162  (14%) 
NOTE: 39 programs at 35 sites submitted fewer ranks than the number of positions available.  As a result, no ranks were submitted for 77 positions, which remained unfilled. 
APA or CPA Accredited Positions: 
Filled in the Match   2,242  (97%) 
Remaining Unfilled       80   (3%) 
Total                 2,322 
Non-Accredited Positions 
Filled in the Match     510  (70%) 
Remaining Unfilled      219  (30%) 
Total                   729 
Non-accredited positions represented 73.2% of all unfilled positions. 
RANKINGS 
-------- 
Average Number of Applicants Ranked Per Position Offered for Each Program: 
Programs Filling All Positions          8.4 
Programs With Unfilled Positions     2.5 
All Programs                            7.5 
Each Registered Applicant was Ranked by an Average of 5.3 Different Programs 
                            APPLICANTS 
                            ========== 
PARTICIPATION 
------------- 
Applicants Registered in the Match                3,825 
Applicants Who Withdrew or Did Not Submit Ranks     227 
Applicants Participating in the Match             3,598 
(includes 42 individuals who participated in the Match as 21 "couples") 
MATCH RESULTS 
------------- 
Applicants Matched                                2,752  (76%) 
Participating Applicants Not Matched           846  (24%) 
Match Results by Rank Number on Applicant's List: 
(percentages may not total to 100 due to rounding errors) 
       Rank              Number of Applicants 
         1                   1,233  (45%) 
         2                     582  (21%) 
         3                     342  (12%) 
         4                     218  ( 8%) 
         5                     137  ( 5%) 
         6                      93  ( 3%) 
         7                      63  ( 2%) 
         8                      25  ( 1%) 
         9                      24  ( 1%) 
        10 or higher            35  ( 1%) 
        Total                2,752 (100%) 
RANKINGS 
-------- 
Average Number of Rankings Submitted Per Applicant: 
Matched Applicants      7.7 
Unmatched Applicants    4.5 
Overall                 6.9 
Each Position was Ranked by an Average of 8.2 Applicants 
====================================================================== 
2009 APPIC MATCH REPORT #2:  SUMMARY OF PROGRAM RANKINGS 
February 23, 2009 
The following report contains additional statistics on how successful  programs were, on average, in matching with applicants. 
There are several important issues that must be considered in  attempting to analyze program success based on the rank numbers of  matched applicants. 
DEFINITIONAL PROBLEMS:  Because each applicant submitted a single  Rank Order List in order to match to a single position, it is easy to  identify his or her "first choice," "second choice," etc.  However,  for an internship program, determining first or second choice  applicants is a far more difficult and complex task.  First, many  programs attempt to fill several positions; if a program has three  positions to fill, an applicant ranked third by that program can in  effect be considered a "first choice" for purposes of the Match.  Furthermore, a significant number of sites submitted multiple Rank  Order Lists for a single program, sometimes ranking the same  applicant on different Lists with different rank numbers.  Also, the  reversion of unfilled positions between lists adds a further  complication to this analysis. 
We worked closely with National Matching Services in an attempt to  resolve these difficulties and to develop a reasonable method of  presenting this data. 
STANDARDIZED RANKINGS:  For the purposes of this analysis, we  converted each site's rankings to a "standardized rank."  This is  best explained by example:  if the number of positions to be filled  from a Rank Order List was three, then the first three applicants on  this List were considered to be "first choice" applicants and given a  standardized rank of 1.  The next three applicants on that List were  defined as "second choice" applicants and given a standardized rank  of 2.  And so on. 
Match Results by Standardized Rank Number on Internship Program List    (percentages may not total to 100 due to rounding errors) 
  Standardized Rank          Number of Applicants Matched 
         1                         1,021  (37%) 
         2                           711  (26%) 
         3                           506  (18%) 
         4                           269  (10%) 
         5                           116  ( 4%) 
         6                            59  ( 2%) 
         7                            33  ( 1%) 
         8                            11  ( 0%) 
         9                             5  ( 0%) 
        10 or higher                  21  ( 1%) 
      Total                        2,752 (100%) 
To interpret this chart:  of all positions that were filled in the  Match, 37% were filled with "first choice" applicants (as defined  above), 26% with "second choice" applicants, and so on. 
Furthermore, 63% were filled with "first" or "second" choice  applicants, while 81% were filled with "third choice" applicants or  better. 
Of course, comparing these numbers to applicants' Match statistics  should be done with extreme caution, given the significantly  different ways in how "first choice", "second choice", etc. were  defined in each analysis.