VA Neuropsychology Post doc - with APA accreditation on contingency

[Neurocaterpillar]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi,

I have an offer from a VA for a neuropsychology fellowship. It says it follows Houston Conference Guidelines. But the APA section says “accreditated on contingency”

What does this mean for me if I would like to obtain board certification? Is this going to impact my long term goals.

Thank you - I’ll appreciate any feedback!

 

[PsyDuck90]

APA accreditation isn’t really necessary for postdocs like it is for internships. For boarding, you want to look at APPCN membership. You don’t need to graduate from an APPCN member postdoc, but it makes the process easier because the program has already been vetted by APPCN and you are assured that it meets the guidelines for boarding. Plus you don’t have to submit proof of all your didactics and stuff for the first phase. You just check a box and move on the to next step.

 

[Neurocaterpillar]

It’s a non match site so it’s not part of APPCN.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

As was said, APA accreditation or full APPCN member status isn't required for getting boarded via ABCN/ABPP, but it does make it easier to apply and to complete the credential review process more quickly. If the fellowship isn't APA-accredited or a full APPCN member, you'll potentially need to submit materials such as didactics schedules and syllabi (and show that all necessary topic areas were covered), document other activities completed and supervision hours received, etc.

Also, if your program is "accredited, on contingency" when you complete it, then it's the same thing as it having been fully accredited (i.e., it counts as completing an accredited program).

I have my own thoughts on sites that don't participate in the match, but I'll keep those to myself.

 

[WisNeuro]

As was said, APA accreditation or full APPCN member status isn't required for getting boarded via ABCN/ABPP, but it does make it easier to apply and to complete the credential review process more quickly. If the fellowship isn't APA-accredited or a full APPCN member, you'll potentially need to submit materials such as didactics schedules and syllabi (and show that all necessary topic areas were covered), document other activities completed and supervision hours received, etc.

Also, if your program is "accredited, on contingency" when you complete it, then it's the same thing as it having been fully accredited (i.e., it counts as completing an accredited program).

I have my own thoughts on sites that don't participate in the match, but I'll keep those to myself.

Yeah, haven't been happy with the shenanigans I've seen over the year. That being said, it is harder for peds people. Last I checked, APPCN needed to get more peds postdocs on board, so I can see why those people need to apply to non-match sites.

 

[RxPsych]

Tangentially related follow up: do all APPCN member sites participate in the match? For example, I'm in the middle of internship interviews for neuro tracks and many of the sites have APPCN postdoc training programs. Many of these sites have mentioned they have a preference for keeping their interns for postdoc, so how does that work with the Match? Do they just not register for the Match if they decide to keep an intern?

 

[PsyDuck90]

Yes, APPCN members need to participate in the match. I suppose they just rank their current interns highly? But I feel like they probably shouldn’t be mentioning that? I don’t know if it is a direct violation of the APPCN match rules, but it seems to be in the gray area depending on the exact language they use. My current postdoc is an APPCN site and has a neuro track internship, and they are very careful to not impose upon the interns that they have a greater chance of matching to the postdoc than other applicants who are being interviewed. Even if we do decide to rank them highly, they try to keep discussion as neutral as possible to stay within the APPCN match guidelines.

 

[Neurocaterpillar]

Yeah, haven't been happy with the shenanigans I've seen over the year. That being said, it is harder for peds people. Last I checked, APPCN needed to get more peds postdocs on board, so I can see why those people need to apply to non-match sites.

Do you think there are any pros and cons of accepting a non match VA (which follows Houston conference guidelines + is apa accredited) over APPCN match site? Other than documentation etc. I’ll appreciate your feedback.

 

[WisNeuro]

Yes, APPCN members need to participate in the match. I suppose they just rank their current interns highly? But I feel like they probably shouldn’t be mentioning that? I don’t know if it is a direct violation of the APPCN match rules, but it seems to be in the gray area depending on the exact language they use. My current postdoc is an APPCN site and has a neuro track internship, and they are very careful to not impose upon the interns that they have a greater chance of matching to the postdoc than other applicants who are being interviewed. Even if we do decide to rank them highly, they try to keep discussion as neutral as possible to stay within the APPCN match guidelines.

Stating a preference to keep interns they like would not be a violation. Stating that they intended to rank a specific intern in a certain spot to other applicants would be. Personally, I have no problem either way, it's a known and understandable phenomenon, might as well have it out there. It's usually clear from looking at the brochures the past few cycles anyway, or a well known thing in that community.

Do you think there are any pros and cons of accepting a non match VA (which follows Houston conference guidelines + is apa accredited) over APPCN match site? Other than documentation etc. I’ll appreciate your feedback.

With APPCN sites, you're getting a known quantity and a much easier board cert process. There are plenty of very good sites not in the match, you just need to do your homework to make sure and keep better records of things (e.g., hours, didactics, etc) because you'll be responsible for proving that you met HCG requirements, instead of simply marking a checkbox and skipping a lot of paperwork.

 

[Neurocaterpillar]

Stating a preference to keep interns they like would not be a violation. Stating that they intended to rank a specific intern in a certain spot to other applicants would be. Personally, I have no problem either way, it's a known and understandable phenomenon, might as well have it out there. It's usually clear from looking at the brochures the past few cycles anyway, or a well known thing in that community.



With APPCN sites, you're getting a known quantity and a much easier board cert process. There are plenty of very good sites not in the match, you just need to do your homework to make sure and keep better records of things (e.g., hours, didactics, etc) because you'll be responsible for proving that you met HCG requirements, instead of simply marking a checkbox and skipping a lot of paperwork.

Thank you so much for your feedback!

 

[PsyNeuro37]

Tangentially related follow up: do all APPCN member sites participate in the match? For example, I'm in the middle of internship interviews for neuro tracks and many of the sites have APPCN postdoc training programs. Many of these sites have mentioned they have a preference for keeping their interns for postdoc, so how does that work with the Match? Do they just not register for the Match if they decide to keep an intern?

Yes, all APPCN members participate in the match. Some non-APPCN member sites can also choose to participate in the match with approval from APPCN.

For APPCN match sites when they would prefer to keep their intern, they would just rank the intern highly/#1, but still otherwise approach the process generally how they normally would. Sometimes these sites might have multiple neuropsych fellow spots too. There is also some specific language in certain scenarios that APPCN sites are allowed to use to communicate somewhat where they have you ranked.

There’s a lot of good info within the APPCN Match Policy: https://natmatch.com/appcnmat/documents/policies.pdf

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Do you think there are any pros and cons of accepting a non match VA (which follows Houston conference guidelines + is apa accredited) over APPCN match site? Other than documentation etc. I’ll appreciate your feedback.

I'd second what WisNeuro said. Beyond that, a pro and con of a non-match site is just that they don't participate in the match. Therefore, they can make you a match outside of (usually before) the match. This can be good for people who want/need to know where they'll be sooner than the match plays out. The downside is the site can then say they need an answer from you ASAP (i.e., before you've heard back from, or probably even interviewed with, every site to which you've applied).

 

[Neurocaterpillar]

I'd second what WisNeuro said. Beyond that, a pro and con of a non-match site is just that they don't participate in the match. Therefore, they can make you a match outside of (usually before) the match. This can be good for people who want/need to know where they'll be sooner than the match plays out. The downside is the site can then say they need an answer from you ASAP (i.e., before you've heard back from, or probably even interviewed with, every site to which you've applied).

Thank you so much for your feedback! I currently have an offer from a non match site, they’re a VA with several board certified neuropsychologists. They follow Houston guidelines and are APA accredited. I was a little worried about accepting the offer because they are non match etc, but all these responses have made me feel less worried and more excited. ☺️