2013 APPIC Match Stats

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

InNae

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
122
Reaction score
21
Last edited:
Is it me, or do they look better this year?
 
Is it me, or do they look better this year?

Yeah, there were something like ~140 more spots than applicants added this year, which is of course a great thing. It's still obviously not the ideal solution (i.e., I don't believe adding new spots is going to permanently fix the problem), but at least it's a start.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Here's hoping that positive effect will still be lasting next year when I apply! :)
 
Here's hoping that positive effect will still be lasting next year when I apply! :)

I'm confused. The match rate is 76%, 24% did not match to APPIC/APA,(this does not include the 400 people that dropped out before the match). Even though they increased the number of spots, isn't the match rate the same as in previous years?
 
I'm confused. The match rate is 76%, 24% did not match to APPIC/APA,(this does not include the 400 people that dropped out before the match). Even though they increased the number of spots, isn't the match rate the same as in previous years?

Last year's match rate was actually right around 74% (after excluding those who withdrew). So it bumped up a tiny bit (about 2.3%).
 
Last year's match rate was actually right around 74% (after excluding those who withdrew). So it bumped up a tiny bit (about 2.3%).

2% is a good start. We'll take anything at this point.
 
2013 APA Filled Positions : 2,431
2013 Registered Applicant : 4,481
2013 APA Match Rate: 54%
2012 APA Match Rate: 52%
 
1. We need to see how many students go outside of APPIC (didn't even register for APPIC + those who withdrew), as I have a sneaking suspicion the #'s for CAPIC will be up and informal training opportunities will more commonly being pursued.

2. More slots may have been added this year, but they aren't APA acred. slots (they need to be eval'd after first class goes through). I want to see what % of those sites will go on to seek/receive APA-acred. status, and how many existing APPIC member sites seek it. Having a bit over half of current interns secure APA acred internships will continue to be a problem going forward, and adding sites that don't lead to APA-acred slots will not address this hugely limiting factor.

84 APA slots are available in Phase II. The list posted in the interview thread has some solid placements. Go get 'em SDN'ers!
 
Last edited:
1. We need to see how many students go outside of APPIC (didn't even register for APPIC + those who withdrew), as I have a sneaking suspicion the #'s for CAPIC will be up and informal training opportunities will more commonly being pursued.
The majority of the field is no longer receiving APA accredited training.
 
The majority of the field is no longer receiving APA accredited training.

Gotta be honest, now that's me since I matched an an APPIC but not APA site.
Hate that now I'm a "step-down" job wise (and being ex'd from VA's, DoD, etc). Stupid that I got into and through an APA accredited PhD program, but that it wasnt good enough.
 
Gotta be honest, now that's me since I matched an an APPIC but not APA site.
Hate that now I'm a "step-down" job wise (and being ex'd from VA's, DoD, etc). Stupid that I got into and through an APA accredited PhD program, but that it wasnt good enough.

It pretty much sucks that regardless of what they do, at this point, over half of all internship applicants (I'm including CAPIC here) can't get an APA spot. It says nothing about the applicants themselves, and everything about the state of affairs that the APA itself (as well as the field as a whole) has allowed to develop.
 
Stupid that I got into and through an APA accredited PhD program, but that it wasnt good enough.

Its misleading to students that the APA provides their "stamp of approval" to programs that have even a 1% APA match rate (I'm not talking about your program specifically bmed). If we were in law school, this would have led to thousands of law suits already.....
 
Members don't see this ad :)
It pretty much sucks that regardless of what they do, at this point, over half of all internship applicants (I'm including CAPIC here) can't get an APA spot. It says nothing about the applicants themselves, and everything about the state of affairs that the APA itself (as well as the field as a whole) has allowed to develop.

That was mostly my point...that before a single interview we already know a large % can't get an APA-acred. slot.
 
Its misleading to students that the APA provides their "stamp of approval" to programs that have even a 1% APA match rate (I'm not talking about your program specifically bmed). If we were in law school, this would have led to thousands of law suits already.....
apparently diploma mills cover their legal ass better than law schools... funny.
 
Apparently if you were in a PhD program your chance of matching increased to 75%

(trying to make myself feel less pessimistic about my chances next year ;))
 
Apparently if you were in a PhD program your chance of matching increased to 75%

(trying to make myself feel less pessimistic about my chances next year ;))

Oh where did you see those numbers? Do you know if this is matching to APA accredited sites? While 75% still isn't ideal, it's far better than the 54% overall.
 
Gotta be honest, now that's me since I matched an an APPIC but not APA site.
Hate that now I'm a "step-down" job wise (and being ex'd from VA's, DoD, etc). Stupid that I got into and through an APA accredited PhD program, but that it wasnt good enough.

Your boat... I am in it.

I can only hope that as we enter the field, folks doing the hiring will understand the circumstances. At least it's APPIC, though...
 
Oh where did you see those numbers? Do you know if this is matching to APA accredited sites? While 75% still isn't ideal, it's far better than the 54% overall.

The link in the OP--it's in one of the tables. It doesn't say if it's APA only though.
 
APA/APAGS just made the following statement:
APA/APAGS Statement on the 2013 APPIC Internship Match

For students in clinical, counseling and school psychology programs, the APPIC Internship Match Day is a critical milestone in their academic careers. The American Psychological Association and American Psychological Association of Graduate Students are encouraged that, during the first phase of the 2013 internship match process, fewer students looking for an internship failed to match than did so last year. However, we also strongly note that the imbalance between the number of students seeking internship and the number of internship positions, particularly accredited internships, is unacceptably high. Helping to resolve the internship crisis is one of APA and APAGS's highest priorities — and will remain so until it is no longer a crisis.

The Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internships Centers released this year's match statistics today:
4,481 students registered for the 2013 match
4,051 students submitted a ranking list
2,515 positions were available at APA- and CPA-accredited internship sites
861 positions were available at APPIC member, non-APA/CPA-accredited internship sites
2,431 students matched to APA- and CPA-accredited internship sites
663 students matched to APPIC member, non-APA/CPA-accredited internship sites

These data indicate a match rate of 76.4 percent to any internship, and 60.0 percent to APA- and CPA-accredited internships.

These numbers reveal that the field is continuing to experience an internship crisis, one that in many cases haphazardly affects students who are otherwise qualified and prepared to be interns. We reiterate that this crisis is complex and requires the continued focus of many stakeholders devoted to short- and long-term solutions, such as the ones APAGS outlined in July 2012 with our official position on the crisis and published in Grus et al. (2012).

For those who did not match to an internship this year, APAGS extends our uncompromising support and encouragement. We understand that no matter how many times you have braced yourself for the possibility of not matching, the reality still stings. This news may also lead you to doubt your abilities and feel let down by others. These are natural feelings, and you are not alone. APAGS is pained to hear stories of students in these predicaments. They are happening far too frequently and affect students who would very likely match in a system that had no shortage. We hope you find constructive ways to further your professional development in the upcoming year. APAGS and APA continue to fight for students in these situations where ever possible.

APAGS recently updated its article describing the next steps for students who did not match. The article contains links to further sources of support.

Those who secured an internship have reason to celebrate the opportunity to continue your professional training and goals without interruption. We hope that you are pleased with your outcome and that you have a great internship training year.

For all students — present and future — APA is extremely concerned about the APPIC internship match imbalance. We have been involved in a number of steps to address it in 2012 and 2013, specifically:

APA funded an Internship Stimulus Package, designed to help currently non-accredited internships achieve APA accreditation. As a result of the advocacy of APAGS and other training groups, APA agreed in August 2012 to fund up to $3 million over three years for this program. So far, APA has funded 32 internships at a total of $600,000.
We are advocating for reimbursement for services provided by clinical interns. Internship sites in numerous states have had difficulty getting reimbursed for services provided by interns. Reimbursement for such services could make it easier to create and fund internship positions.
APA's Commission on Accreditation is at a historic moment in considering revisions to its Guidelines and Principles, providing APAGS with several opportunities to outline our concerns and recommendations related to the internship crisis. We consider each question and comment an opportunity to advance our goal of an APA-accredited internship position for every student in an APA-accredited doctoral program. At "Courageous Conversations 2," an internship crisis dialogue among APAGS, APPIC and various councils of doctoral training programs in December 2012, APAGS spoke to the needs of its members:

§ We asked doctoral training councils to encourage doctoral programs to provide financial assistance to students who do not match in the APPIC match. This support could include an assistantship with a stipend or free tuition to students who need to stay enrolled to document full-time status. All training councils agreed to recommend this to their member programs.
§ We will educate applicants to doctoral programs about the internship match so they can make fully informed decisions about their education and training. APAGS premiered these materials in January 2013 and will continue to develop and share information at conferences, on the Web and through its Campus Representative network.
 
2% is definitely a good start, considering that things were getting consecutively worse year after year. However, the APA spent 3 million dollars this year on the internship crisis, and 2% doesn't seem like a good ROI. Limiting class size and applicant numbers is the only feasible solution, and until someone puts that in place, nothing is going to significantly change.

To be fair, I think the APA has actually only spent $600k of the $3M they've earmarked for internship spending (at least according to the APAGS statement above).

Still, though, I completely agree with you--"pruning" on the front end seems to be the best, if not only, humane option with long-term viability. It definitely beats the unfair selecting out that is currently occurring on the back end.

Although I do also think that APA's "advocating" (assuming they're actually doing it) to have interns' services be reimbursable is another step in the right direction. This could end up helping with reimbursement of services by unlicensed graduates/post-docs as well.
 
2. More slots may have been added this year, but they aren't APA acred. slots (they need to be eval'd after first class goes through). I want to see what % of those sites will go on to seek/receive APA-acred. status, and how many existing APPIC member sites seek it. Having a bit over half of current interns secure APA acred internships will continue to be a problem going forward, and adding sites that don't lead to APA-acred slots will not address this hugely limiting factor.


"Of the 186 additional positions, 154 (83%) were in APA- or CPA-accredited programs."

Better than I thought, the 60% APA match rate is still horrid.
 
Looking at the match stats, 426/4435 initially registered for the match withdrew. setting the 426 next to the number of unmatched (1041) and we have almost 1,500 people who had intended to move on to internship and yet did not do so. 426 seems like a lot of people to withdraw--does anyone have any insight into how to best understand what this number represents, and howe it fits into the internship training crisis?
 
Don't people usually withdraw if they don't get interviews?
 
I think that's often the case, but i was wondering if there were other reasons that would account for a sig. amount of those 4--+. When you think about it from that angle, the 76.4% match rate does not reflect 100's of people who submitted APPI'S who didn't "match" at an earlier phase, by not getting interviews . if in fact most of them withdrew due to lack of interviews, with sites often overwhelmed by increasing #'s of applications (I think the median this year was 16), thinking about these folks as "not matching" even though they did not go through te actual match may better reflect the crisis.
 
Don't people usually withdraw if they don't get interviews?

That's what I'd think. i've also heard that some of the big offender FSPS schools strongly encourage students to withdraw if they have only have one or two options that are considered long shots.
 
The average # of applicants per site was 97 (IIRC). I'm not sure of the distribution, but it caught my eye. That is starting to get unmanageable across the board.

Something like 1 - over 400, though I think that applications per spot would be a more useful statistic. I wonder why they don't do it that way.
 
Something like 1 - over 400, though I think that applications per spot would be a more useful statistic. I wonder why they don't do it that way.

I'm guessing the 400+ was the Boston Consortium, which regularly gets 300-350+ apps. Applications per spot would help bc there are definitely more 1:50+ than people probably realize.
 
Don't people usually withdraw if they don't get interviews?

There are some people who apply to non-appic sites as well. If you receive an offer from a non-appic site before submitting your rank order, you can withdraw from the process if you wish.
 
Don't people usually withdraw if they don't get interviews?

I know at my school they make you withdraw if we don't have our 100% dissertation draft completed by rank order submission day as we are required to have our dissertations defended before start of internship. I also know a few people who withdrew last year for non-school reasons (e.g. Pregnancy).
 
Your boat... I am in it.

I can only hope that as we enter the field, folks doing the hiring will understand the circumstances. At least it's APPIC, though...

I am also in that situation....completing an accredited program but in a non APA/CPA accredited internship. The situation needs to be addressed for sure - especially given the range of quality of training....and knowing that the quality of the training at some APA/CPA accredited sites is much lower than some of the non-accredited sites.

Hopefully this won't pose a major barrier in success for the next step. :(
 
It pretty much sucks that regardless of what they do, at this point, over half of all internship applicants (I'm including CAPIC here) can't get an APA spot. It says nothing about the applicants themselves, and everything about the state of affairs that the APA itself (as well as the field as a whole) has allowed to develop.

I hear you, but good luck explaining that on post-doc interviews, right?
 
I hear you, but good luck explaining that on post-doc interviews, right?

Explaining not matching? I don't honestly know if that would come up at all, although if it did, I'd imagine most postdoc TDs are fairly clued in as to the internship situation (I know mine is).
 
Explaining not matching? I don't honestly know if that would come up at all, although if it did, I'd imagine most postdoc TDs are fairly clued in as to the internship situation (I know mine is).

Good to hear, but not quite what I meant. Explaining why a person who wants to be in clinical health did their internship in community mental health. Is explaining that I got my "back up'" APPIC only (non APA) internship going to be enough to convince a postdoc training director that I am the person they want to come to their postdoc program, or are they now going to choose TONS of other applicants that got the sites that I wanted to get (APA accred & in clinical health psych) who now want to continue their training in the same area.

I'm a step down, and even if TD's get that the match is unfair and I'm just trying to get the same experience I desperately want, it doesnt mean they'll choose me instead of now higher qualified people. Sadly, I dont think pity works that well.

AA/others- I edited to clarify and add this: If you know of post docs where I can get clinical health/bmed experience where they truly dont care that my internship is APPIC only, feel free to PM me. At this point, I'll do anything. I mean, anything. Literally.
 
Last edited:
Good to hear, but not quite what I meant. Explaining why a person who wants to be in clinical health did their internship in community mental health. Is explaining that I got my "back up'" APPIC only (non APA) internship going to be enough to convince a postdoc training director that I am the person they want to come to their postdoc program, or are they now going to choose TONS of other applicants that got the sites that I wanted to get (APA accred & in clinical health psych) who now want to continue their training in the same area.

I'm a step down, and even if TD's get that the match is unfair and I'm just trying to get the same experience I desperately want, it doesnt mean they'll choose me instead of now higher qualified people. Sadly, I dont think pity works that well.

AA/others- I edited to clarify and add this: If you know of post docs where I can get clinical health/bmed experience where they truly dont care that my internship is APPIC only, feel free to PM me. At this point, I'll do anything. I mean, anything. Literally.

As a training director of an APPIC, non-APA site I know that the Kaiser health system requires APPIC and definitely takes graduates of non-APA programs. Based on the experience of our grads, I do not think they preference APA internships and that they do understand the supply-demand problem as well as the cost factor that makes APA accreditation impossible for many community-based training programs. As more of their post-docs get APA accredited, they may skew toward a preference BUT I also see that they actually look at what you did on your internship in terms of specific activities and your capacity to work at the Kaiser pace and in diverse communities. They know that CMHC systems give you a good broad generalist training, SMI knowledge, and group intervention skills. And with ACA coming in 2014 there are only going to be more Kaiser model programs, so focus on building your skills and presenting them in an interview and trust the process. You may feel, as you call it "a step down" on the status ladder, but at the post-doc stage you will be entering the actual work world and your individual ability to present and promote your skills becomes a variable much more within your control.
 
Thanks docma. Until a few days ago (specifically 2/22/2013)... I thought I was pretty good at presenting my skills. Perhaps I am, but it can't hurt to work on it for sure.
 
Also remember that there will be psychologists out there hiring who were also in your shoes at one time. This problem has been around for more than a decade and the field inevitably has folks who will be hiring who did not get the APA advantage either.
 
AA/others- I edited to clarify and add this: If you know of post docs where I can get clinical health/bmed experience where they truly dont care that my internship is APPIC only, feel free to PM me. At this point, I'll do anything. I mean, anything. Literally.

If you are geographically flexible and open to positions outside of health psychology for post-doc then you have a higher chance of getting a spot. I think getting a behavioral medicine spot will be tough since most of those spots are at VA hospitals and medical centers, which will require an APA internship. Kaiser prioritizes APA internships but you may be able to get into Kaiser in a less desirable location (maybe not San Francisco) or in a less competitive position like substance abuse. Did your program encourage you to rank the APPIC position?
 
If you are geographically flexible and open to positions outside of health psychology for post-doc then you have a higher chance of getting a spot. I think getting a behavioral medicine spot will be tough since most of those spots are at VA hospitals and medical centers, which will require an APA internship. Kaiser prioritizes APA internships but you may be able to get into Kaiser in a less desirable location (maybe not San Francisco) or in a less competitive position like substance abuse. Did your program encourage you to rank the APPIC position?

True on the VA having many health psychology postdocs--- good gracious.
No, my program did not encourage me to rank the APPIC site. Honestly, I know this is stupid in retrospect.. but I didnt think I'd match there. I thought I'd rank them 8 and end up being at one of the 7 med centers above it (6 were VA's and 1 was a med school). I really didnt consider the full and career killing implications which I now wish I did. As this was my second time in the match, I really just wanted an internship so I could move on with life. Now I'm faced with the reality that I may have to move in a different direction within my field because my internship. Gonna be hard getting a post doc in clinical health psych/bmed since they're all in VAs and uber competative med schools and I've basically just been X'd from ever working in the VA.
 
Actually, you can work in the VA in a research position as a psychologist; our grads have done this, some of which include clinical or behavioral med aspects.
 
I'm guessing the 400+ was the Boston Consortium, which regularly gets 300-350+ apps. Applications per spot would help bc there are definitely more 1:50+ than people probably realize.
The site that received the highest number of applications was actually Bellevue (I believe it was 491)
 
... Maybe I should remove Montefiore from my list for next year!
 
... Maybe I should remove Montefiore from my list for next year!

If you think it's a good fit in terms of training and focus, I'd say to give it a shot. I almost removed a grad school from my list due to it seeming out of my league stats-wise, but I ended up getting admitted with a fellowship (although I ended up choosing not to attend, it was a strong contender).
 
... Maybe I should remove Montefiore from my list for next year!

Sometimes you get interviews at places that are incredibly competitive like Montefiore and then rejections from places that are not nearly as competitive. It's all about the elusive fit.

I just saw that Montefiore has a 40K stipend. I haven't seen one that high before (aside from the military). No wonder they get so many apps.
 
Last edited:
Jeez, that is a good stipend! Although the cost of living is higher, but most internships where that's the case still don't pay that well.
 
Updating to add Phase II results:

http://www.appic.org/Match/MatchStatistics/MatchStatistics2013PhaseII.aspx

Also just want to say I found this paragraph (bottom of the linked page) a little disingenuous:

"NOTE: Due to the limited number of APA- and CPA-accredited positions available in Phase II, along with the high desirability of these positions, students who applied only to accredited programs in Phase II (due to personal choice and/or restrictions by their graduate programs) likely experienced greater difficulty in getting matched."

Obviously "personal choice" includes applicants who know that an accredited internship is vital to their career goals, but this kind of makes it sound like such applicants were somehow not optimizing their chances by not pursuing an unaccredited internship.
 
Ooooh, that phrasing does irritate me a little bit.
 
I look at the data this morning, and if I recall there were 903 applicants signed up for Phase II....and 77 total APA spots. 75 matched and I believe 2 withdrew. Let me type that again...NINE HUNDRED applicants and SEVENTY-SEVEN total APA spots. That is ridiculous. I haven't crunched the total #'s for all applicants (between Phase I & Phase II) v. APA-acred. spots...but last year less than 60% of all applicants could possibly match to an APA-acred. site. Something is broken when that is the case...probably multiple things.
 
Top