2012 APPIC Internship Application Thread

[NotTheHoff]

For those of you looking at sites for Phase II: although the Larned State Hospital site is currently non-accredited, they had a site visit last Spring (2011) and were given a few recommendations for revision that are currently being implemented. I know that may still be too risky for those of you who will only consider APA-accredited programs, but it may be a site worth exploring (if its training opportunities are relevant to you, of course). They seemed fairly open about where they were in the process, so perhaps they would field any questions you have about that.

They also informed me (I did a phone interview) that the stipend was being increased substantially (an additional $10,000) for the incoming class.

Best of luck!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[O Gurl]

What are your ideas? I assume "complaining about initiatives others are taking" isn't going to do much to stop the imbalance either.

It's really easy to be a part of a whiny culture of "no, that won't work." It's a lot harder to step up and actually do something.

Agreed. Thanks for speaking up. Action--any action-- beats simply ridiculing the ideas of others.

Anyway congrats to all who matched and best wishes to all those who are still negotiating this process.

 

[PerhapsMaybeOk]

Please distribute to interested parties. We were just recently funded and have four openings for Phase II.

The Orlando VA Predoctoral Psychology Internship Program is pleased to announce four newly funded internship positions for 2012-2013. The program participates in the APPIC Match, and abides by all APPIC and APA guidelines and requirements regarding internship application and selection procedures. We are offering four internship positions in the 40 hour per week year-long program, with a stipend of $23,974. Individuals energized by being in at the start of a new venture will likely find this experience particularly rewarding. The Orlando VA Predoctoral Psychology Internship Program is not a member of APPIC due to recent funding, and is not accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of the American Psychological Association. Interns completing this internship will have completed a non-accredited, non-APPIC member internship. However, interns completing this internship program will be eligible for employment in postdoctoral training positions and staff psychology positions within the Veterans Affairs hospitals and clinics, under an exception granted by the VA to newly created VA internships.

APPLICATION PROCEDURES AND DEADLINES
MANDATORY QUALIFICATIONS:
1. Have completed at least three years of graduate course work in an APA-accredited clinical or counseling psychology training program in good standing.
2. Have successfully defended the dissertation proposal.
3. Have completed a minimum of 650 hours assessment/intervention supervised clinical practica, with preference given to 500+ hours intervention and 150+ assessment hours.
4. Must be a citizen of the United States.

Your online AAPI application package should include: a Verification of Internship Eligibility and Readiness completed by your University Director of Clinical Training, all official graduate transcript(s), three letters of reference from faculty members/practicum supervisors, a cover letter, and a curriculum vitae. Applications are reviewed by the Director of Psychology Training (TD) and may also be reviewed by a panel of staff psychologists. Ratings will be based on the following: transcripts, quality and amount of assessment and therapy experience, letters of recommendation, writing skill, professional activities, diversity experience and interests.

The Orlando VA Medical Center APPIC MATCH Number is 222111: Complete application packets should be submitted through the AAPI Online portal by 11:00 AM Eastern Time Zone on Thursday March 1, 2012 for consideration for internship appointment beginning August 2012. Interviews will be conducted by phone for select applicants who will be notified by email or phone. Once the matches are announced by email on Match Day, each matched applicant will be contacted by phone to verify the match.

The Psychology Department includes over 40 doctoral level psychology staff. Our training model is that of scientist-practitioner within a generalist model, with opportunity for specialized training. Training will occur in three four-month major rotations with a plan for additional mini/minor rotations. As we cannot estimate the demand for particular rotations, the TD cannot guarantee that all interns will receive all of their choices for rotation, although every effort will be made. The TD will work with each intern to design a program that meets their training goals within the generalist emphasis of this internship.

TRAINING EXPERIENCES include: Neuropsychology (to include bilingual assessment practices with special emphasis on Hispanic populations; cognitive rehabilitation), trauma/PTSD, OIF/OEF, recovery-based practice, chronic pain management psychology, Community Based Outpatient Clinic (suburban and rural locations), rehabilitation psychology, psychodiagnostic assessment, women’s health/military sexual trauma, substance use disorders, health psychology, primary care mental health integration, health care administration, forensics/disability, general mental health, home based primary care, and geriatrics. The internship will include a variety of training seminars, not limited to: psychodiagnostic and neuropsychological assessment, psychotherapy, and professional development.

The Orlando VA Medical Center, one of the Top 100 Companies for working families, was officially established as a new VA facility in October of 2006. The Orlando VA healthcare system currently includes a 120-bed Community Living Center, a 60-bed Domiciliary, and VA’s largest comprehensive outpatient clinic at the Orlando site, two large comprehensive, satellite outpatient clinics in Daytona Beach and Viera, four Community-Based Outpatient Clinics in Kissimmee, Leesburg, Clermont and Orange City, a new Polytrauma TBI program, and a new Primary Care annex to be activated in Lake Nona.
Orlando’s new “Medical City” is under construction, shining an international spotlight on the area’s growing life sciences/biotech sector. The VA has joined with others to create a new medical destination for research, education and patient care. With the recent opening of the University of Central Florida’s new College of Medicine, the building of several prestigious medical research institutes, and the construction of the new Orlando VA Medical Center (forecasted opening Fall 2013) and a highly-specialized Children’s Hospital, Orlando is rapidly becoming a prime destination for healthcare professionals and patients seeking state-of-the-art care.

Orlando is recognized as a family-oriented area, with a warm, sunny climate, beautiful beaches, abundant housing options, no state income tax, and many local entertainment attractions/outdoor activities readily available. The Orlando VA system is affiliated with the University of Central Florida’s new College of Medicine and with numerous other allied health programs in local community colleges. Working for the Department of Veterans Affairs offers a comprehensive benefits package that includes, in part, paid vacation, sick leave, holidays, life insurance, health benefits. For more information please visit http://www4.va.gov/jobs/job_benefits/benefits.asp. The Department of Veterans Affairs is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Women and minority applicants are particularly encouraged to apply. All selected interns’ packets will be sent to Human Resources which will then begin the process of employment, which includes a physical exam and clearance through a national data bank. Please contact the TD with any questions.

Valerie Masten Hoese, Ph.D.
Director, Psychology Training; Clinical Neuropsychologist
Orlando VAMC; Crossroads Annex
5201 Raymond Street; Orlando, FL 32803
(407) 621-2623; [email protected]
Associate Professor University of Central Florida College of Medicine
Adjunct Professor Rollins College

 

[eudaimonPsyD]

Well as I had expected, I didn't match. Going to Phase II, but I don't know if the future is looking much brighter. There are many sites that I just simply won't qualify for.

The horrible and annoying thing that I know will be happening at school on Monday is the admin celebrating that we actually had people match in Phase I this year (because pathetically, this has never happened). They will be celebrating this instead of thinking how their poor practices set the bulk of us up to not even be competitive for internship. It's going to take all my power not to explode at them.

Congratulations to all who matched. I am glad that some people can be happy today and can focus on the future; I am envious in the nicest way possible.

Time to go to my paid job...hopefully slaving over an espresso machine and being treated like dirt by my snobby coffee customers will get my mind off everything.

 

[Kappadocia]

Well as I had expected, I didn't match. Going to Phase II, but I don't know if the future is looking much brighter. There are many sites that I just simply won't qualify for.

The horrible and annoying thing that I know will be happening at school on Monday is the admin celebrating that we actually had people match in Phase I this year (because pathetically, this has never happened). They will be celebrating this instead of thinking how their poor practices set the bulk of us up to not even be competitive for internship. It's going to take all my power not to explode at them.

Congratulations to all who matched. I am glad that some people can be happy today and can focus on the future; I am envious in the nicest way possible.

Time to go to my paid job...hopefully slaving over an espresso machine and being treated like dirt by my snobby coffee customers will get my mind off everything.

Wow, that sounds like a terrible environment (and situation) to be in

I sincerely empathize with those who didn't get in and I hope things improve for you all.

 

[psydperson]

For those of you in California (or those who want to move to California), there are 2 good sites that still have openings:
Cal State Fullerton counseling center and UC Riverside counseling center.
UC Riverside is appic approved but not APA. Fullerton is not an Appic member yet due to this being its first year as an internship program, but they are applying for membership this fall (apparently they can't even apply for the membership until they actually have interns there so they are waiting to have the inaugural class start) and they are really confident they will become members.
Good luck to everyone who is participating in Phase II.

 

[PurplePants80]

How many sites are people who didn't match planning to apply to, if you've gotten that far yet?

I'm waivering between not lowering my training goal requirements, and just biting the bullet and apply to any place that doesn't have a bad reputation and has one component that I would be excited about.

 

[4410]

I'm waivering between not lowering my training goal requirements, and just biting the bullet and apply to any place that doesn't have a bad reputation and has one component that I would be excited about.

It does not seem fair that people have gone through this two years in a row and have not matched. I would think that there needs to be some sort of precedence for those who are applying for the second year to have priority over people applying for the first time. I've never been able to figure out the funding issue for internship site staff. Seems that the internship sites are dropping out due to losing funding sources and that internship sites have reduced slots due to funding issues.

I did not believe I would match my first time around due to being in a professional PsyD freestanding program, so I have had the mindset that I would need to find my own internship site, but many of the independent practitioners indicate that their census or caseload is down and they do not like the additional paperwork involved with supervising interns. When I discovered that I matched this morning a very heavy burden was lifted so I can only imagine the stress of the students who did not match.

With all of the current sites, if each site could have some sort of waiver this year to have an additional intern that is funded through a grant from APA or some other source my guess is everyone would be placed this year.

I was reading some comment on another site and someone indicated the great need for psychologists in other countries where they have limited mental health services. It may be a viable source to have doctoral level interns working in other countries during their internship year under supervision of a psychologist in a similar fashion of how the "Peace Corps" or "Missionary" work. Students who volunteer for completing internships where there is a severe shortage of psychologist could have their student loans amounts reduced significantly by each year they work in the areas where there is a severe shortage of psychologist.

I don't know if this is the answer but it sure seems that most psychology oriented websites are discussing the internship imbalance today with serious attempts to find solutions or answers to the current problem.

I believe that standards are necessary for doctoral internships, but my feeling is that many of the current sites could add one or two more slots and reduce the funding of each of their interns by an averaging formula for all of the interns at their site. Rather than have two interns paid $20,000 each have three interns and pay them $14,000 each. Even with pay of $20,000 each most of us will have to get Grad Plus loans to make it through the year. Some internships sites pay much higher amounts than do other internship sites so why not have them lower their pay in comparison to the average pay and add additional internship slots at those sites? My feeling is that all of the internship slots should have the same pay or mandatory pay in the range of $15,000 to $18,000 rather than some sites paying a significantly higher amount up to $51,000 dollars.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

It does not seem fair that people have gone through this two years in a row and have not matched.

I agree, it isn't a just world/system.

Congrats on matching.

One thing that bothers me now is that I can't just come up with my own internship, as my program won't let me. But they didn't let me rank an APPIC member site last year, either, and they let everyone else rank APPIC member sites (as I realized today that I was the only one who didn't match last year to somewhere, eventually). I feel held back by my program and, I think a bit, by APPIC and APA standards. I get that they're there to standardize training but I think I could get excellent training with similar experiences at a ton of places that would never consider seeking APPIC membership, never mind APA accreditation.

My 3 cover letters are done, applications are ready to go. Just waiting for program/site updates to be posted tomorrow afternoon.

*grumble grumble grumble* (This is my official noise for the remainder of my time on sdn - which may be just 4.5 weeks away! *GRUMBLE GRUMBLE GRUMBLE*)

Oh, also, the differences in intern stipends are often related to the cost of living in a particular area (and, sometimes, minimum wage laws, implicitly).

 

[clinpsych]

I believe that standards are necessary for doctoral internships, but my feeling is that many of the current sites could add one or two more slots and reduce the funding of each of their interns by an averaging formula for all of the interns at their site. Rather than have two interns paid $20,000 each have three interns and pay them $14,000 each. Even with pay of $20,000 each most of us will have to get Grad Plus loans to make it through the year. Some internships sites pay much higher amounts than do other internship sites so why not have them lower their pay in comparison to the average pay and add additional internship slots at those sites? My feeling is that all of the internship slots should have the same pay or mandatory pay in the range of $15,000 to $18,000 rather than some sites paying a significantly higher amount up to $51,000 dollars.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

I'm waivering between not lowering my training goal requirements, and just biting the bullet and apply to any place that doesn't have a bad reputation and has one component that I would be excited about.

As Ferris Bueller said, "If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up."

Meaning (in my train of thought), that you can apply to as many sites as you may possibly have any remote interest in and see if you get any interviews. Then you can turn down the interview if you change your mind about the site for some reason or you can choose not to rank a program if you don't like it after you interview there. Keeping options open (to a reasonable extent) can't hurt. Good luck!

 

[Kappadocia]

I believe that standards are necessary for doctoral internships, but my feeling is that many of the current sites could add one or two more slots and reduce the funding of each of their interns by an averaging formula for all of the interns at their site. Rather than have two interns paid $20,000 each have three interns and pay them $14,000 each. Even with pay of $20,000 each most of us will have to get Grad Plus loans to make it through the year. Some internships sites pay much higher amounts than do other internship sites so why not have them lower their pay in comparison to the average pay and add additional internship slots at those sites? My feeling is that all of the internship slots should have the same pay or mandatory pay in the range of $15,000 to $18,000 rather than some sites paying a significantly higher amount up to $51,000 dollars.

After studying for 5 - 6 years, providing (free) therapy for years to different populations, and having a unique skill set that the site will make money off of, you really believe that internship sites should give pennies to the people who are actually doing the work? People can't even survive on 15k - that's around the poverty level!

 

[Reality1234]

THANKS GUYS FOR ALL OF YOUR SUPPORT AND RELIEF!!

I got my number 1 !!!

Hang in there guys!!

 

[clinpsych]

Congratulations to all those who matched this year! To those who did not, I hope something amazing awaits you in Phase II or next year!

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

After studying for 5 - 6 years, providing (free) therapy for years to different populations, and having a unique skill set that the site will make money off of, you really believe that internship sites should give pennies to the people who are actually doing the work? People can't even survive on 15k - that's around the poverty level!

15k is on the low side but not unheard of in the Northeast. The highest stipend at the sites I applied to was 27k and the lowest (over the course of my 2 years of applications) was 15k. This is why I cannot understand why internships are disappearing due to lack of funding. When you pay people who work full time about 25% of what they would be making as a licensed psychologist but you have them do all the same things, I just don't get how you're losing money, even if you have licensed psychologists supervise them for a couple hours a week. I'd like to see the math.

Check out appic.org for the directory of internship sites and see what they pay near you. This is not a field that pays well, given the amount of training and red tape involved.

 

[LMK]

Looking at the Phase 2 list, I see that Wright-Patterson AFB has an open slot. I highly recommend that individuals look into this. The Air Force has amazing training opportunities if you're willing to commit to internship plus 3 more years. I matched to an AF internship and would be happy to discuss it if you have questions.

It was my #1 and I didn't match. Beyond devastated.

 

[one percent]

I agree, it isn't a just world/system.

Congrats on matching.

One thing that bothers me now is that I can't just come up with my own internship, as my program won't let me. But they didn't let me rank an APPIC member site last year, either, and they let everyone else rank APPIC member sites (as I realized today that I was the only one who didn't match last year to somewhere, eventually). I feel held back by my program and, I think a bit, by APPIC and APA standards. I get that they're there to standardize training but I think I could get excellent training with similar experiences at a ton of places that would never consider seeking APPIC membership, never mind APA accreditation.

My 3 cover letters are done, applications are ready to go. Just waiting for program/site updates to be posted tomorrow afternoon.

*grumble grumble grumble* (This is my official noise for the remainder of my time on sdn - which may be just 4.5 weeks away! *GRUMBLE GRUMBLE GRUMBLE*)

Oh, also, the differences in intern stipends are often related to the cost of living in a particular area (and, sometimes, minimum wage laws, implicitly).

I'm just curious...what would happen if your school told you that you couldn't rank an APPIC accredited site but you did, and matched, anyways? Would that be an option for you? I've been keeping up with this thread and it is clear your school doesn't have your best interest at heart. Can you do what's best for you despite your school's recommendation?

 

[O Gurl]

4410, I have no doubt that you are well intentioned in your suggestions, but your post is exactly why the imbalance is so concerning to so many people. As a field, we have to get realistic about market demands and get serious about standards of practice. Simply lowering stipends and creating more slots will not solve the larger issue which is oversaturation of the field. In fact, that would only perpetuate the problem by increasing the avg debt load for new psychologists, further varying training standards, and further devaluing the services we offer. Giving 2nd time applicants preference would unfairly punish 1st time applicants.

 

[PurplePants80]

Question for those of you who got interviews at Brown and UCSF (phase 1 this year, or either phases last year), will they still look at you if you have no zero pubs? I've got a few in the pipelines (3 first authors), and close to 10 presentations/symposium, but due to the nature of the research projects, we haven't been able to work on the manuscript until the last year (too busy creating training protocols, treatment manuals, etc). Just curious if I should invest any time in writing cover letters for these places (which I will explain the 0 pubs, and so will my advisor in his LOR) or just forget it?

Basically, has anyone gotten an interview at either places with 0 pubs? Thanks in Advance.

 

[3rdWave]

My feeling is that all of the internship slots should have the same pay or mandatory pay in the range of $15,000 to $18,000 rather than some sites paying a significantly higher amount up to $51,000 dollars.

eek: Sorry, but I think that this is an absurd solution. Many internship applicants come from fully funded PhD programs (and would not have it any other way), and compete successfully for higher paying APA accredited internships. Training directors from these internships are happy because they can attract top applicants. Why would they want to lower the stipend to get more interns from (likely) lower quality training programs who will need closer and more careful supervision and possible remediation? Many TDs feel bad about the imbalance, but don't necessarily want to take on interns from FSPPs. Some internships cannot accommodate more interns and maintain training quality.

 

[4410]

eek: Sorry, but I think that this is an absurd solution. Many internship applicants come from fully funded PhD programs (and would not have it any other way), and compete successfully for higher paying APA accredited internships. Training directors from these internships are happy because they can attract top applicants. Why would they want to lower the stipend to get more interns from (likely) lower quality training programs who will need closer and more careful supervision and possible remediation? Many TDs feel bad about the imbalance, but don't necessarily want to take on interns from FSPPs. Some internships cannot accommodate more interns and maintain training quality.

Have you checked the APA classified lately....there are a large number of doctoral level jobs advertised. Nationwide there is a shortage of psychologists, especially in underserved rural areas. I believe once you reach this point in your training with three years of supervised practicum, how can you rationalize a need for even closer supervision is absolutely necessary.

If every current site accepted one additional intern this year, it would reduce the number of unmatched interns. At the doctoral level, by the time you begin your internship you should be ready to function independently with only need for consultation and collaboration. Doctoral level internships should not require ongoing weekly supervision at this level of competence. The whole turf issue does not hold water as the FSPS turn out highly skilled psychologist due to the emphasis on practicum and clinical supervision throughout your training. Please get off of this horse as it is not the issue or even the problems, as many internship sites prefer PSYD students over PHD students.

 

[3rdWave]

Have you checked the APA classified lately....there are a large number of doctoral level jobs advertised. Nationwide there is a shortage of psychologists, especially in underserved rural areas. I believe once you reach this point in your training with three years of supervised practicum, how can you rationalize a need for even closer supervision is absolutely necessary.

If every current site accepted one additional intern this year, it would reduce the number of unmatched interns. At the doctoral level, by the time you begin your internship you should be ready to function independently with only need for consultation and collaboration. Doctoral level internships should not require ongoing weekly supervision at this level of competence. The whole turf issue does not hold water as the FSPS turn out highly skilled psychologist due to the emphasis on practicum and clinical supervision throughout your training. Please get off of this horse as it is not the issue or even the problems, as many internship sites prefer PSYD students over PHD students.

Interns work under the license of the TD and other supervisors. Thus, it is up to them to decide how many interns to train, and who to trust to work under their license, and how much supervision is necessary. There is a great deal of variability in the skill sets of internship applicants. Some need more supervision than others to practice competently and ethically.

If FSPS turn out such great psychologists, why do they struggle to compete for internships?

Some of us psychologists-in-training expect to get paid to work, and didn't make poor life choices to get into massive debt going to FSPS of questionable quality. I didn't take out loans to go to grad school, and I certainly am not going to take out loans to work on internship so I can subsidize the training of people who made questionable educational and career choices. I feel bad for people who don't match and the system needs to be changed, but I disagree with the changes you suggest.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

Um, seriously people, the highest stipend in 4 Northeastern states (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts) is/was 27k and that was unusually high (most were under 25k and above 17k or 18k). 27k for 50 weeks of working 5 days per week (say 2 weeks vacation/sick pay during the year) works out to $108 per day. Pretax (I don't know how taxes on stipends work). Work 9AM-5PM and you get $13.50 per hour. Again, these calculations are based on an unusually high stipend. 18k works out to $9 per hour.

The more I look at the math on internships, the more I wonder if I'm better off starting to learn computer programming (serious option/comment).

 

[docma]

Um, seriously people, the highest stipend in 4 Northeastern states (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts) is/was 27k and that was unusually high (most were under 25k and above 17k or 18k). 27k for 50 weeks of working 5 days per week (say 2 weeks vacation/sick pay during the year) works out to $108 per day. Pretax (I don't know how taxes on stipends work). Work 9AM-5PM and you get $13.50 per hour. Again, these calculations are based on an unusually high stipend. 18k works out to $9 per hour.

.

Technically APPIC standards are no more than 50% of your hours are in direct service and the other time is in training and supervision--so that would get you up to $18/hour for those you are "working" for the agency...but that is still hard to live on. In any case, hang in there because your optimistic spirit is needed in the field and you should be able to complete an internship and your degree.

Then you can add programming skills and become a clinic manager.

 

[3rdWave]

You make an excellent point. Even "high paying" internships are ridiculously low paying given our level of education. I could make more at McDonalds than I make at my internship- and I am at a high paying intern ship!

I noticed post-docs offering 25k salaries while on the job hunt. Sorry, but this is a slap in the face! Seriously, HARVARD offering 24k post doc salaries?? Who can do this but trust fund babies, or people cool with financial ruin, or people with high earning spouses??

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

Technically APPIC standards are no more than 50% of your hours are in direct service and the other time is in training and supervision--so that would get you up to $18/hour for those you are "working" for the agency...but that is still hard to live on. In any case, hang in there because your optimistic spirit is needed in the field and you should be able to complete an internship and your degree.

Then you can add programming skills and become a clinic manager.

Quit shoulding all over me!



I know that other posters, in the past, have gone through this 3 times. I don't think I like clinical psychology, as a field, enough to stick with it for that long. You don't want me? Fine! I don't want you, either!

And the 18/hour doesn't include time for notes/paperwork, just like fee-for-service people. (Me, optimistic? No way!)

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

I'm just curious...what would happen if your school told you that you couldn't rank an APPIC accredited site but you did, and matched, anyways? Would that be an option for you? I've been keeping up with this thread and it is clear your school doesn't have your best interest at heart. Can you do what's best for you despite your school's recommendation?

Thanks for following my drama.

I thought about this last year, very briefly. My conclusion was that my program would be pissed and not let it count as an internship (or they would make me withdraw from it, which would mess up my future chances of matching) so I would have to apply for another internship the following year, which is something APPIC discourages. My program could have kicked me out, too, for something along the lines of mutiny. (I liked someone's typo earlier, "intern ship" - got me thinking about pirates. )

They have/had the power in the situation. My options are to comply/wait/delaylife or withdraw. I waited a year, here I am again. I'd love to withdraw today but my wise mind is saying to wait and see what happens in Phase II, think about what I want some more. (Reasonable mind is the one doing all the math and calculating the costs of waiting... It's why I'll be learning/starting programming later today instead of getting an SPSS license and analyzing my dissertation data.) Decisions, decisions.

*grumble grumble grumble*

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Have you checked the APA classified lately....there are a large number of doctoral level jobs advertised. Nationwide there is a shortage of psychologists, especially in underserved rural areas. I believe once you reach this point in your training with three years of supervised practicum, how can you rationalize a need for even closer supervision is absolutely necessary.

If every current site accepted one additional intern this year, it would reduce the number of unmatched interns. At the doctoral level, by the time you begin your internship you should be ready to function independently with only need for consultation and collaboration. Doctoral level internships should not require ongoing weekly supervision at this level of competence. The whole turf issue does not hold water as the FSPS turn out highly skilled psychologist due to the emphasis on practicum and clinical supervision throughout your training. Please get off of this horse as it is not the issue or even the problems, as many internship sites prefer PSYD students over PHD students.

I'm really wondering where the idea that there's a shortage of psychologists is coming from. For every currently-unfilled rural position, I'd imagine there are three or four doctoral-level practitioners in California, New York, etc. to fill it if they wanted to move.

We're currently churning out ~1k more individuals per year than we can train via our internship infrastructure. And, according to some TDs, the overall quality of many applicants has been lowering over the past few years (e.g., fewer assessment and therapy hours, greater need for supervision, less ability to "hit the ground running" due to inadequate preparation by their doctoral programs). We need to stop training so many people, raise accreditation standards, better develop a standard model of doctoral training, streamline the accreditation process, and lobby better for scope of practice protection.

 

[evm2103]

I still can't believe that only 52% of application nationwide matched to an APA accredited site. That is crazy!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Have you checked the APA classified lately....there are a large number of doctoral level jobs advertised. Nationwide there is a shortage of psychologists, especially in underserved rural areas.

There is a shortage of nurses in those areas too, but the increase of nurses aren't even touching those needs, instead there are just more nurses trying to get jobs in NYC, SF, etc.

I believe once you reach this point in your training with three years of supervised practicum, how can you rationalize a need for even closer supervision is absolutely necessary.

....because many/most students do not have full competency to practice with minimal supervision? Internship is about filling in the gaps, refining skills, and preparing the intern for the 'real world.' Sites are doing a disservice to interns if they provide minimal supervision/mentorship for that year.

Let's look at the 3 years of practica training. The first year of practica training the student may work in the school's clinic. They gain experience with the 'nuts and bolts' of therapy and assessment. The second year of practica training may include working with a specific population...let's say substance abuse. The student learns all about substance abuse treatment. The third year, which some/many students don't complete, they work out in the community at a CMHC.

The above practica experience sounds great.....right? Sure. In ideal situation I think it'd provide a great basis for training. This could work if the supervision was top notch, but there are still things you don't experience. What happens if the student spent all of their time in the university clinic? What if a student receives minimal assessment experience? Many of those things are picked up on internship, but they require close mentorship.

If every current site accepted one additional intern this year, it would reduce the number of unmatched interns. At the doctoral level, by the time you begin your internship you should be ready to function independently with only need for consultation and collaboration. Doctoral level internships should not require ongoing weekly supervision at this level of competence.

Interns don't know what they don't know. Most will be wonderful clinicians, and I'm not worried about them. I'm worried about the ones with large blind spots that think they should already be out and licensed. The intern year for doctoral students is meant to tie everything together...it isn't for cheap labor and gathering hours.

To clarify, I'm talking about generalist training, I'm not even talking about specialized training. I'm not talking about forensic assessment or health psychology. I'm not talking about rehabilitation psychology or neuropsychology. Those areas need additional training beyond doctoral training and internship. Doctoral training and internship is meant to be generalist training...but even that has been undercut.

The whole turf issue does not hold water as the FSPS turn out highly skilled psychologist

Yes...they can and do, but top to bottom there is more variance. The top students in FSPS would probably do well in another program, they may even be stellar because they are often doing more with less support. These students are the ones who publish in journals and present at national conferences.

I met a couple of Argosy students from Atlanta(?) at an international conference a few years ago, and their research was well designed, based on sound statistical methods, and their discussion section was well reasoned. They did it within a clinical setting and they used an EBT. It was a good first step towards a larger opportunity because it functioned as a 'proof of concept' project. I'm not sure if they did anything with it, but it was a nice snapshot across different areas of competency that helped display some sound clinical and research skills.

The problem is everyone at FSPS are not these students. I asked these students about other research going on in their program, and they said that most of the professors weren't doing research. They had to seek out and really be pro-active in getting their research done. They sought out additional mentorship. Conversely, the vast majority of their cohort wasn't involved in research/stats work. They weren't attending conferences. They weren't learning EBTs. They were just 'getting by'. I know it sounds like I'm harping on research and productivity...but it matters when you consider it helps build a foundation for future learning. You learn how to learn. You learn how to be critical of data.

due to the emphasis on practicum and clinical supervision throughout your training. Please get off of this horse as it is not the issue or even the problems, as many internship sites prefer PSYD students over PHD students.

Again...this argument doesn't hold water because the average # of hours reported each year for APPIC supports the same or more hours by Ph.D. students as compared to Psy.D. students. The average length of completion is about a year more, which allows for that extra experience as data is collected for dissertations. For full disclosure, I'm not a Ph.D. I'm a Psy.D. from a university program that has had the opportunity to train at some top programs in the country, and I have seen the training differences first hand.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

*grumble grumble grumble*

Your situation is the perfect storm that should scare the crap out of every doctoral program, the APA, and APPIC. If you sued your program for requiring a certain level of internship acred....without providing adequately to get you there (one part of what you'd need to successfully argue), they'd get hung out to dry. I've been hoping for some students to come together and make this an issue. They may push it off on you, but with the numbers as they are now, it will get harder and harder to defend a broken system.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Your situation is the perfect storm that should scare the crap out of every doctoral program, the APA, and APPIC. If you sued your program for requiring a certain level of internship acred....without providing adequately to get you there (one part of what you'd need to successfully argue), they'd get hung out to dry. I've been hoping for some students to come together and make this an issue. They may push it off on you, but with the numbers as they are now, it will get harder and harder to defend a broken system.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

It was my #1 and I didn't match. Beyond devastated.

I'm really sorry.

Not the same thing but also not a good feeling: both this year and last year, sites that I applied to but didn't even get an interview at have spots open for Phase II. Last year, the site didn't offer me an interview in Phase II either. (We'll see how this year goes but I think it will be the same thing.) They really didn't have any interest in me or my career at all. Not that they should, contractually or whatever, but it still hurt(s).

Anything in Phase II look good to you?

 

[psychgeek]

I was reading some comment on another site and someone indicated the great need for psychologists in other countries where they have limited mental health services. It may be a viable source to have doctoral level interns working in other countries during their internship year under supervision of a psychologist in a similar fashion of how the "Peace Corps" or "Missionary" work. Students who volunteer for completing internships where there is a severe shortage of psychologist could have their student loans amounts reduced significantly by each year they work in the areas where there is a severe shortage of psychologist..

This is a really good idea. I think the accreditation practices for APA would have to be altered a little bit, but there are a ton of places that need people to provide psychological services and the profession in the US would benefit from having interns return with a more global perspective. Language barriers would be an issue, but translators could be used, and the interns could go through intensive language training similar to what is provided to peace corp volunteers. The model would be even more viable if it were a two-year internship/post-doc position. This would be far less expensive than running an internship in the US, and I actually think positions abroad would be pretty popular with applicants from even the best programs.

I believe that standards are necessary for doctoral internships, but my feeling is that many of the current sites could add one or two more slots and reduce the funding of each of their interns by an averaging formula for all of the interns at their site. Rather than have two interns paid $20,000 each have three interns and pay them $14,000 each. Even with pay of $20,000 each most of us will have to get Grad Plus loans to make it through the year. Some internships sites pay much higher amounts than do other internship sites so why not have them lower their pay in comparison to the average pay and add additional internship slots at those sites? My feeling is that all of the internship slots should have the same pay or mandatory pay in the range of $15,000 to $18,000 rather than some sites paying a significantly higher amount up to $51,000 dollars.

I don't think this would work quite as well. Although salary is one component of the cost of an APA approved internship, it isn't the largest one for sites like academic medical centers and the VA. Health insurance, liability insurance, office expenses, and the time the supervisors put into training and accreditation are all likely to exceed the cost of the salary. Assume you have the minimum possible supervision at an internship site. When I was working with an internship site, this meant 2 hrs individual, 1 hr group, and 1 hr didactic (I think). At 125/hr, this means that the site pays 500/week for the first intern and 375/week for each one that follows in lost billing. Of course, any good site is going to provide more supervision than this, so realistically the cost in lost billing is going to be closer to 625 or 750 per week per intern. That means that every intern displaces over 30k in billing each year. Health insurance can add another 12k to this easily. Liability/office expenses depend upon the setting, but they can be higher than you would think.

The other side of this equation is that interns aren't able to pull in much billing themselves. The practice of billing for services rendered by an intern under a supervisor's NPI is probably illegal, and a lot of insurance companies refuse to reimburse for services that clearly come from an intern. Medicare has incredibly strict, vague rules (as medicare is wont to do) that make it hard to tell when a trainee can bill for services but are very clear that if you mess up medicare will take lots of your money and throw you in jail. A lot of big hospitals just don't bother with trying to bill for interns anymore.

The result of all of this is that a psych intern is more expensive than a masters level clinician even though they are paid far less. I think this is the part of the internship imbalance that has been ignored by psychology. Yes, there has been a huge increase in the number of applicants, but there has also been a huge decrease in the economic incentives for a site to offer pre-doctoral training.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

Your situation is the perfect storm that should scare the crap out of every doctoral program, the APA, and APPIC. If you sued your program for requiring a certain level of internship acred....without providing adequately to get you there (one part of what you'd need to successfully argue), they'd get hung out to dry. I've been hoping for some students to come together and make this an issue. They may push it off on you, but with the numbers as they are now, it will get harder and harder to defend a broken system.

I actually have discussed this with family members because it is an unimaginable situation. Last year, the program allowed other students to rank APPIC member sites, including the one that I was not allowed to rank. I was the only internship applicant not matched and not allowed to rank an APPIC member site. Without going into details, it seems like a case of discrimination.

I realized last night that I was the canary in the coal mine. The program has gotten by so far with luck and getting students in anywhere that there's an opening. The faculty - without legitimate reason - decided to screw me over last year, as they could still maintain a high match rate. This year, we've got just over 50% matched (no word on APPIC or APA stats yet). The number of unmatched students from my program this year is probably larger than most of your cohorts. A lot will probably find somewhere in Phase II but it's a bad sign for the program...

Also, one faculty member has highlighted the absurdity of having a training requirement that the program cannot provide students with the chance to meet. So that part of the case seems proven to me... But I'm pretty biased here.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

Although salary is one component of the cost of an APA approved internship, it isn't the largest one for sites like academic medical centers and the VA. Health insurance, liability insurance, office expenses, and the time the supervisors put into training and accreditation are all likely to exceed the cost of the salary. Assume you have the minimum possible supervision at an internship site. When I was working with an internship site, this meant 2 hrs individual, 1 hr group, and 1 hr didactic (I think). At 125/hr, this means that the site pays 500/week for the first intern and 375/week for each one that follows in lost billing. Of course, any good site is going to provide more supervision than this, so realistically the cost in lost billing is going to be closer to 625 or 750 per week per intern. That means that every intern displaces over 30k in billing each year. Health insurance can add another 12k to this easily. Liability/office expenses depend upon the setting, but they can be higher than you would think.

The other side of this equation is that interns aren't able to pull in much billing themselves. The practice of billing for services rendered by an intern under a supervisor's NPI is probably illegal, and a lot of insurance companies refuse to reimburse for services that clearly come from an intern. Medicare has incredibly strict, vague rules (as medicare is wont to do) that make it hard to tell when a trainee can bill for services but are very clear that if you mess up medicare will take lots of your money and throw you in jail. A lot of big hospitals just don't bother with trying to bill for interns anymore.

The result of all of this is that a psych intern is more expensive than a masters level clinician even though they are paid far less. I think this is the part of the internship imbalance that has been ignored by psychology. Yes, there has been a huge increase in the number of applicants, but there has also been a huge decrease in the economic incentives for a site to offer pre-doctoral training.

I appreciate you offering some numbers for consideration. But I'm still not convinced about the math because
1 - many internship sites do offer the minimum supervision and stick to it (good site or not)
2 - many internship sites do not offer good benefits, including health insurance (!!!)
3 - at least in my region of the country, practica students with Masters get their own NPI and sites bill for their services like other Masters level providers, with supervision and supervisors' signatures as appropriate (no fraud, just when a licensed psychologist is needed in addition to the Masters level), so I find it hard to believe that interns can't be / aren't set up the same way. [Disclaimer: I don't know enough about billing to know how it works but I know that I got my MA, my practicum site signed me up for an NPI, and other sites/jobs have asked if I have one and they used it for something, and I haven't been pursuing Masters level licensure supervision ever.]

 

[psychgeek]

Your situation is the perfect storm that should scare the crap out of every doctoral program, the APA, and APPIC. If you sued your program for requiring a certain level of internship acred....without providing adequately to get you there (one part of what you'd need to successfully argue), they'd get hung out to dry. I've been hoping for some students to come together and make this an issue. They may push it off on you, but with the numbers as they are now, it will get harder and harder to defend a broken system.

I'd like to be more positive about this, but I can't. There isn't a lawsuit here. This isn't legal advice, of course, but I don't think there is a promising cause of action based upon my limited understanding of law.

There is no breach of contract (either expressed or implied) because the program presumably has not changed the requirements since you agreed to enroll. Implied warranty won't work because there school is providing a service rather than a good, and implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose only applies to goods. A tort in negligence is hard to imagine since you'd have to prove an affirmative act that caused a failure to match and that this act failed to meet the industry custom for an ordinary, reasonable doctoral program. Failure to act (conduct of omission) won't work because there is no legal duty for your school to protect you from failing to match.

The only thing I could see would be something under fraud/misrepresentation. This, of course, would require some sort of misrepresentation. The fact that match numbers changed is not a misrepresentation by itself unless you were given assurances that they would not change, a reasonable person would have believed those assurance to be reliable, and you chose to enroll based upon your reliance upon those assurances.

This is why the law school cases are not applicable to psychology. The students who are suing their law schools are alleging misrepresentation in the employment numbers published by the schools themselves.

Random aside: I have been wondering if there is a possibility of a due process fundamental rights claim against state boards of professional regulation for unreasonably burdening the right to practice a trade. Federal courts have been pretty permissive in the past with state regulations that limit entry into professions, but the mood of the Supreme Court seems to have changed with respect to states' rights to regulate private action. Maybe substantive economic due process could make a return. Probably not, but it would make a good law and psychology journal article.

 

[psybee]

I co-train with medical interns/residents and their salaries are around 45k for their training years. Brining down our compensation to below less than half of what MD's make is not a solution. Our training inequity will not help us maintain/develop respect from other disciples or gain parity in health care settings.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

A tort in negligence is hard to imagine since you'd have to prove an affirmative act that caused a failure to match and that this act failed to meet the industry custom for an ordinary, reasonable doctoral program.

This one sounds about right. I would have to get records from the school about how many students they have allowed to rank APPIC member sites. However, they allowed it every year for like a decade (at least) based on public stats. Last year, they allowed another student to rank the exact same APPIC member site that I wanted to rank at the same time that (or after) I applied for permission to rank it. They said that they felt my training goals would best be met by an APA accredited internship... But at least one other student was allowed to rank this site. So why would an APA accredited internship best meet my training goals but not those of my fellow students? (This is where, I believe, the discrimination part comes in.) A majority of students who complete an internship complete a non-APA internship, so that is customary in the field.

I don't know, it just seems like I've met only a handful of psychologists in my training who I would like to emulate in any way (no offense, I haven't met any of you). I don't feel like fighting/suing to better a field that has shown 0 interest in helping me enter it.

 

[psychgeek]

I appreciate you offering some numbers for consideration. But I'm still not convinced about the math because
1 - many internship sites do offer the minimum supervision and stick to it (good site or not)
2 - many internship sites do not offer good benefits, including health insurance (!!!)
3 - at least in my region of the country, practica students with Masters get their own NPI and sites bill for their services like other Masters level providers, with supervision and supervisors' signatures as appropriate (no fraud, just when a licensed psychologist is needed in addition to the Masters level), so I find it hard to believe that interns can't be / aren't set up the same way. [Disclaimer: I don't know enough about billing to know how it works but I know that I got my MA, my practicum site signed me up for an NPI, and other sites/jobs have asked if I have one and they used it for something, and I haven't been pursuing Masters level licensure supervision ever.]

1- True. Unfortunate, but true.
2- Really! I am a few years out, but I thought almost every site offered health insurance. That is awful. It takes a special kind of hypocrite to fail to provide people they employ as HEALTH PROVIDERS health insurance.
3- This is the confusing part. It isn't entirely clear whether this is legal or not. Most small groups I know of do supervisor billing, and most hospitals I know of do not. I didn't bother reading the latest implimenting standards for medicare (since I am not practicing anymore), but the previous regulations stated that the billing clinician had to be present for the critical medical intervention (or some such language). So, for therapy, what the h#ll is the critical medical intervention? It seems that the clinician should have to see the person being billed for all appointments at the very least, but maybe not with therapy. Maybe the critical medical intervention is the formulation that takes place in supervision? Who knows. The problem is that if you guess wrong, and you are a hospital, medicare will figure out the proportion of billing that was incorrect for the random charts they pull and then fine you an amount equal to that proportion of your total medicare billing. So if you guessed wrong (or medicare disagreed with you), and an intern provided 50% of the services to the clients whose charts were pulled, then medicare would take 50% of the money they had paid to you for all of your clients during the audit period. Small groups are willing to take this chance because they are judgment proof. A small group practice typically owns a coffee pot, a lease, and an LLC that can immunize the individuals from federally imposed fines provided there was no intent to defraud.

Edit: Also, small groups are willing to take this chance because they don't know they are taking this chance. Very few small practices consult with a lawyer before deciding how to structure their billing, but the same is not true for large hospital systems.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

Edit: Also, small groups are willing to take this chance because they don't know they are taking this chance. Very few small practices consult with a lawyer before deciding how to structure their billing, but the same is not true for large hospital systems.

My practica and jobs were at community mental health centers and other large organizations. Billing departments etc. If the person with the NPI - the Masters level unlicensed clinician supervised by a licensed clinician - is providing the services, it makes sense that there's no fraud and that the agency is paid/reimbursed for the services by insurance.

Internship match news program updates: http://www.appic.org/Match/APPIC-Match-Phase-II/Phase-II-News

So I'm submitting my applications in a couple minutes and exploring non-psych career options. Good luck everyone!

 

[Qwnpixie]

I matched with my number one. I'm also the one who had to go to class the morning of the match...

I just want to let you all know how that went.

Of course, I was ecstatic that I matched, and to my number one nonetheless... (I didn't really think I had a snowball's chance in hell for that spot... too competitive I thought).

The class was a disaster. We had 60% is match rate... not bad for a professional school. But it was so akward! I just wanted to say that I was SOOO surprised by the people who didn't match this year. It made me very, very upset. The class was ******ed, as we all assumed it would be here on the thread.


Anyhow, I'm sending positive thoughts to all those who are in phase II.

 

[jimmyachance]

The class was ******ed, as we all assumed it would be here on the thread.

i'm not typically one to harp on this kind of thing, but harsh language from a future psychologist! ouch!

 

[mcs207]

So after I completed my internship survey last night I had a thought and wanted to see how others see this...

Would it be possible for APPIC/NMS to give us feedback as to how many sites ranked us as applicants? Not a specific rank number or names of any individual sites that ranked us, but rather the number of sites that submitted a rank order list with our name on it. That might be useful for people who did not match and interesting for those who have matched.

The other idea I had was that APPIC could encourage more sites to let students know if we are still under consideration post interview/before the match date. That way if you had a large number of interviews, but didn't get ranked by a site, that might tell you that you need to work on interviewing skills.

I just think it is terrible that people had several interviews and didn't match and will never know why. Did they get ranked by any sites at all? Was it just the way that the numbers played out? I just feel that it becomes a giant guessing game without applicants getting some sort of feedback about what happened.

Thoughts? I'm sure that there are a number of issues with this (like if you had only one interview than you would know which site had decided not to rank you), but I'm just trying to think of ways to improve this system.

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

I just think it is terrible that people had several interviews and didn't match and will never know why. Did they get ranked by any sites at all? Was it just the way that the numbers played out? I just feel that it becomes a giant guessing game without applicants getting some sort of feedback about what happened.

Thoughts? I'm sure that there are a number of issues with this (like if you had only one interview than you would know which site had decided not to rank you), but I'm just trying to think of ways to improve this system.

No comment/opinion on your ideas, other than I hope you put them in the survey.

Something I learned yesterday was that a site can choose to only take a certain number of people from each graduate program. I don't know for sure but I think that had an impact on my match results last year, as someone from my program matched to one of the few sites I ranked in Phase II, and we had pretty similar stats. This year, I wonder if the same thing happened at the same site. (Maybe I'll find out if I stick around but I certainly won't - stick around - if I don't get interviews in Phase II. *grumble grumble grumble*)

My 3 applications for Phase II submitted, yay! No dealing with this til Thursday. I really do like Phase II the best of the whole thing.

Good luck to everyone

 

[psybee]

and there is no higher power that you can appeal to regarding how your program is (not) addressing your training goals? my heart just aches for you--you are one tough cookie!

 

[paramour]

Congrats to all the SDN folks who matched!!!

To those who did not, GOOD LUCK as you proceed with whatever path you choose moving forward for the next upcoming round(s).

Our department was like a frakkin' ghost town yesterday apparently. No one spoke of match unless it was in hushed whispers, so there were no happy thoughts for those few who did match. (Hell, we were off-campus at an event, and people still spoke in low voices.) 50% matched in our uni-PhD program. Not the expected outcome since we had a 100% match rate the past few years. And not particularly happy thoughts since our APA accreditation is up for review this year.

In the meantime, the remaining folks aren't very optimistic (and not being helped by our department) as there are "very few APA-accredited sites remaining that are up to our training expectations." We're required to completed an APA-accredited site, so no APA, no match. How likely is that . . . ?

And then I found it somewhat amusing (not really), when I hear some of our junior students in the program talking about the whole ordeal.

"So what, it's just another year that they have to wait around."

"What's the likelihood that they wouldn't match two years in a row? It just doesn't happen . . . "

Are these people really that naive? Or do they intentionally have their heads stuck in the proverbial hole in the ground?

I don't think any of them have yet to think about how those 50% sticking around for another year will affect our (already crappy) assistantship/practicum situation. Knowing our department, they will likely want to "do what they can" to help those students be even more competitive next year by giving away the few clinical spots we have to those applicants--even though they've already had more than their fair share of clinical opportunities. This will then have the effect of preventing some students who are attempting to apply for internship for the first time and some students who have yet to have their first practicum opportunities (who should be in line for one) the possibility of having any practicum next year. These students are then delayed in their training. The whole situation sucks a big one, and I only foresee it getting worse.

 

[psybee]

"We're currently churning out ~1k more individuals per year than we can train via our internship infrastructure. And, according to some TDs, the overall quality of many applicants has been lowering over the past few years (e.g., fewer assessment and therapy hours, greater need for supervision, less ability to "hit the ground running" due to inadequate preparation by their doctoral programs). We need to stop training so many people, raise accreditation standards, better develop a standard model of doctoral training, streamline the accreditation process, and lobby better for scope of practice protection."

 

[Duck Duck Goose]

and there is no higher power that you can appeal to regarding how your program is (not) addressing your training goals? my heart just aches for you--you are one tough cookie!

Thanks. I prefer to think of myself as an oppositional cookie due to my environment. (I'm so willing to take up forum space to make bad/dumb jokes and lament my current difficulties. I need to cut down on this potentially maladaptive coping strategy.)

Is there a higher power in particular that you're thinking of? The University wouldn't do anything because the PsyD program makes them a ton of money and brings in students from all over the place (typical cohort size is 20-25, I think, with annual tuition above $20k, non-coursework tuition greater than 3500, and an internship tuition - you pay the school when you go on internship - of more than $750).

Something that hits me as very sad is that I'm certain the director of the program feels that things are not right with it but this person has no control over the faculty's decisions or the program's policies. (A psychologist in a figurehead role. Who knew?) And this person stays with the job because it pays well and gives this person, maybe, the illusion of control or the potential to be helpful to students and the field.

So APA might be the next step up but they were at the school in the past couple of years and I don't think any of the huge issues were revealed (I was far from campus so couldn't go to talk to the reps and the early-on-in-training students aren't aware of the issues yet... they come up about halfway through the 2nd year but aren't obvious until coursework is almost done... I should've dropped out my first semester when I became dissatisfied). Other students have made formal complaints to the APA. These students were sort of blacklisted in the program as troublemakers and told that they should have gone through the proper channels. I really think that people stay in the program after seeing the problems because they've already invested so much money in the degree. :cry:

I wish a billionaire would offer to reimburse tuition for clinical psych students who choose to discontinue their training and "help people" in another way. Life lessons, oh well.

I'm happy my apps are done for good, though.

 

[SingingCow]

You make an excellent point. Even "high paying" internships are ridiculously low paying given our level of education. I could make more at McDonalds than I make at my internship- and I am at a high paying intern ship!

I noticed post-docs offering 25k salaries while on the job hunt. Sorry, but this is a slap in the face! Seriously, HARVARD offering 24k post doc salaries?? Who can do this but trust fund babies, or people cool with financial ruin, or people with high earning spouses??

People without family (human or pets) responsibilities who come from a fully-funded research-oriented doctoral program, and have been living frugally and saving up for several years. It is not ideal, but doable.