Match Statistics - 2018 - Phase I

2018 APPIC Match Statistics - Phase I

Match Report from the APPIC Board of Directors
February 23, 2018

 

We are pleased to report that 3,163 applicants were successfully matched to internship positions in Phase I of the 2018 APPIC Match. More than half (51%) of all applicants who obtained a position matched to their first choice internship program, nearly three-quarters (73%) received one of their top two choices, and about six-in-seven (85%) received one of their top three choices.

A total of 432 applicants were not matched to an internship position in Phase I, while 184 applicants withdrew or did not submit a Rank Order List.

For the first time, there were fewer registered applicants (3779, down 142 or 3.6% from 2017) than the number of internship positions offered (3906, up 57 or 1.5%). The decrease in applicants was likely related to the stricter Match eligibility requirements that were implemented this year, which reduced the number of doctoral programs whose students were eligible to participate in the Match.


  2017 MATCH 2018 MATCH
 
Participating Doctoral Programs:
452     
420     
        Accredited
404     
412     
        Non-Accredited
48     
8     
 
Registered Applicants:
3,921     
3,779     
        From Accredited Programs
3,675     
3,727     
        From Non-Accredited Programs
246     
52     

A total of 743 positions remained unfilled. There were 294 internship sites (37%) that had at least one unfilled position. This includes 28% of accredited sites (174 of 622) and 72% of non-accredited sites (120 of 166).

The historical shortage of accredited internship positions improved again this year; compared to 2017, the number of accredited positions increased by 214 (6.8%) to 3,383, while the number of non-accredited positions decreased by 157 (23.1%) to 523. Despite this improvement, the number of registered applicants still exceeded the number of accredited positions by 396 (compared to a difference of 752 last year and 1,020 in 2016).

The 2012 APPIC Match was the point of the worst imbalance between applicants and positions since the Match began in 1999. Here is a comparison of the 2012 and 2018 APPIC Matches (Phase I only):


    2012 MATCH 2018 MATCH
6-YEAR CHANGE
 
Applicants: Registered for the Match
4,435     
3,779     
-656    (-15%)

Withdrew or did not submit ranks
426     
184     
-242    (-57%)

Matched
2,968     
3,163     
+195     (+7%)

Unmatched
1,041     
432     
-609    (-59%)
   

Positions: Offered in the Match
3,190     
3,906     
+716   (+22%)
  Filled
2,968     
3,163     
+195     (+7%)
  Unfilled
222     
743     
+521 (+235%)
   

  Accredited (APA or CPA)
2,361     
3,383     
+1,022   (+43%)
  Non-Accredited
829     
523     
-306    (-37%)
   

Number of registered applicants exceeded number of positions by (negative number in 2018 denotes positions exceeded applicants):
1,245     
-127     
-1,372               
   

Number of registered applicants exceeded number of accredited positions by:
2,074     
396     
-1,678   (-81%)


The 2018 APPIC Match statistics are provided below, in four sections:




APPLICANTS

PARTICIPATION IN PHASE I
Applicants Registered in the Match
3,779
Applicants Who Withdrew or Did Not Submit Ranks
184
Applicants Participating in the Match
(includes 34 individuals who participated in the Match as 17 "couples")
3,595


APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED IN PHASE I
Number of Applicants Who Submitted Applications in Phase I
3,710
Total Number of Applications Submitted in Phase I
56,970
Average Number of Applications Submitted by Applicants in Phase I (SD = 5.0)
15.4
Median Number of Applications Submitted in Phase I
15
Range of Applications Submitted in Phase I
1 - 42

NOTE: For comparison purposes, applicants submitted an average of 16.3 applications in 2013, 15.9 in 2014, 15.8 in 2015, 15.8 in 2016, and 15.2 in 2017.


MATCH RESULTS IN PHASE I
Applicants Matched
3,163
88%
Participating Applicants Not Matched
432
12%


MATCH RESULTS BY RANK NUMBER ON APPLICANT'S LIST
(Percentages may not total to 100 due to rounding errors)
Rank
Number of Applicants
1
1,616
51%
2
687
22%
3
398
13%
4
192
6%
5
107
3%
6
65
2%
7
43
1%
8
19
1%
9
14
0%
10 or higher
22
1%
TOTAL
3,163
100%


RANKINGS IN PHASE I
                Average Number of Rankings Submitted Per Applicant:
Matched Applicants
8.0
Unmatched Applicants
3.3
Overall
7.4

Each Position Was Ranked by an Average of 6.8 Applicants.




INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS


PARTICIPATION IN PHASE I
Training Sites Participating in the Match
788
Programs Participating in the Match
1,476
Positions Offered in the Match
3,906

NOTE: A "training site" can offer more than one "program" in the Match. Each "program" was identified in the Match by a separate 6-digit code number.


APPLICATIONS RECEIVED IN PHASE I
Sites Receiving Applications in Phase I
791
Total Number of Applications Received in Phase I
56,970
Average Number of Applications Received in Phase I (SD = 62.7)
72.0
Median Number of Applications Received in Phase I
59
Range of Applications Received in Phase I
1 - 395

NOTE: For comparison purposes, sites received an average of 97.9 applications in 2013, 89.8 in 2014, 84.9 in 2015, 79.1 in 2016, and 74.2 in 2017.


MATCH RESULTS IN PHASE I
               Positions:
Filled in the Match
3,163
81%
Remaining Unfilled
743
19%
               Programs:
Filled in the Match
1,077
73%
With Unfilled Positions
399
27%

NOTE: 55 programs at 49 sites submitted fewer ranks than the number of positions available. As a result, no ranks were submitted for 108 positions, which remained unfilled.


APA- OR CPA- ACCREDITED POSITIONS
Filled in the Match
2,926
86%
Remaining Unfilled
457
14%
TOTAL
3,383


NON-ACCREDITED POSITIONS
Filled in the Match
237
45%
Remaining Unfilled
286
55%
TOTAL
523

Non-accredited positions represented 13.4% of all positions but 38.5% of unfilled positions.


RANKINGS IN PHASE I
               Average Number of Applicants Ranked Per Position Offered for Each Program:
Programs Filling All Positions
8.4
Programs With Unfilled Positions
4.1
All Programs
7.2

Each Registered Applicant Was Ranked by an Average of 6.5 Different Programs.




DOCTORAL PROGRAM PARTICIPATION AND RESULTS


SUMMARY OF PARTICIPATING DOCTORAL PROGRAMS
PROGRAM TYPE
DEGREE SOUGHT
NUMBER OF DOCTORAL PROGRAMS
NUMBER OF REGISTERED APPLICANTS
 
 
Accredited
Non-Accred.
Totals
Accredited
Non-Accred.
Totals
Clinical
Ph.D.
194
1
195
1,424
3
1,427
Psy.D.
67
5
72
1,489
38
1,527
Ed.D.
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTALS
261
6
267
2,913
41
2,954
Counseling
Ph.D.
69
0
69
400
0
400
Psy.D.
8
1
9
72
9
81
Ed.D.
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTALS
77
1
78
472
9
481
School
Ph.D.
55
0
55
197
0
197
Psy.D.
6
1
7
30
2
32
Ed.D.
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTALS
61
1
62
227
2
229
Combined
Ph.D.
9
0
9
63
0
63
Psy.D.
4
0
4
52
0
52
Ed.D.
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTALS
13
0
13
115
0
115
ALL PROGRAMS
Ph.D.
327
1
328
2,084
3
2,087
Psy.D.
85
7
92
1,643
49
1,692
Ed.D.
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTALS
412
8
420
3,727
52
3,779


APPLICANT RESULTS BY DOCTORAL PROGRAM TYPE AND DEGREE
PROGRAM TYPE
DEGREE SOUGHT
MATCHED
UNMATCHED
WITHDREW OR NO RANKINGS SUBMITTED
TOTAL
Clinical
Ph.D.
1,231
86.3%
144
10.1%
52
3.6%
1,427
Psy.D.
1,224
80.2%
220
14.4%
83
5.4%
1,527
TOTALS
2,455
83.1%
364
12.3%
135
4.6%
2,954
Counseling
Ph.D.
360
90.0%
26
6.5%
14
3.5%
400
Psy.D.
59
72.8%
12
14.8%
10
12.3%
81
TOTALS
419
87.1%
38
7.9%
24
5.0%
481
School
Ph.D.
163
82.7%
15
7.6%
19
9.6%
197
Psy.D.
21
65.6%
8
25.0%
3
9.4%
32
TOTALS
184
80.3%
23
10.0%
22
9.6%
229
Combined
Ph.D.
56
88.9%
5
7.9%
2
3.2%
63
Psy.D.
49
94.2%
2
3.8%
1
1.9%
52
TOTALS
105
91.3%
7
6.1%
3
2.6%
115
ALL PROGRAMS
Ph.D.
1,810
86.7%
190
9.1%
87
4.2%
2,087
Psy.D.
1,353
80.0%
242
14.3%
97
5.7%
1,692
TOTALS
3,163
83.7%
432
11.4%
184
4.9%
3,779


MATCHED APPLICANTS BY ACCREDITATION STATUS OF INTERNSHIP AND DOCTORAL PROGRAMS
DOCTORAL PROGRAM ACCREDITATION STATUS
MATCHED TO ACCREDITED INTERNSHIP
MATCHED TO NON-ACCREDITED INTERNSHIP
TOTAL
Accredited
2,904
92.6%
231
7.4%
3,135
Non-Accredited
22
78.6%
6
21.4%
28
ALL PROGRAMS
2,926
92.5%
237
7.5%
3,163


MATCHED APPLICANTS BY ACCREDITATION STATUS OF INTERNSHIP PROGRAM
AND DOCTORAL PROGRAM TYPE AND DEGREE
PROGRAM TYPE
DEGREE SOUGHT
MATCHED TO ACCREDITED INTERNSHIP
MATCHED TO NON-ACCREDITED INTERNSHIP
TOTAL
Clinical
Ph.D.
1,199
97.4%
32
2.6%
1,231
Psy.D.
1,094
89.4%
130
10.6%
1,224
TOTALS
2,293
93.4%
162
6.6%
2,455
Counseling
Ph.D.
350
97.2%
10
2.8%
360
Psy.D.
39
66.1%
20
33.9%
59
TOTALS
389
92.8%
30
7.2%
419
School
Ph.D.
138
84.7%
25
15.3%
163
Psy.D.
11
52.4%
10
47.6%
21
TOTALS
149
81.0%
35
19.0%
184
Combined
Ph.D.
51
91.1%
5
8.9%
56
Psy.D.
44
89.8%
5
10.2%
49
TOTALS
95
90.5%
10
9.5%
105
ALL PROGRAMS
Ph.D.
1,738
96.0%
72
4.0%
1,810
Psy.D.
1,188
87.8%
165
12.2%
1,353
TOTALS
2,926
92.5%
237
7.5%
3,163


SUMMARY OF PROGRAM RANKINGS


The following report contains additional statistics on how successful programs were, on average, in matching with applicants during Phase I of the APPIC Match.

There are several important issues that must be considered in attempting to analyze program success based on the rank numbers of matched applicants.

DEFINITIONAL PROBLEMS: Because each applicant submitted a single Rank Order List in order to match to a single position, it is easy to identify his or her "first choice," "second choice," etc. However, for an internship program, determining first or second choice applicants is a far more difficult and complex task. First, many programs attempt to fill several positions; if a program has three positions to fill, an applicant ranked third by that program can in effect be considered a "first choice" for purposes of the Match. Furthermore, a significant number of sites submitted multiple Rank Order Lists for a single program, sometimes ranking the same applicant on different Lists with different rank numbers. Also, the reversion of unfilled positions between lists adds a further complication to this analysis.

We worked closely with National Matching Services in an attempt to resolve these difficulties and to develop a reasonable method of presenting this data.

STANDARDIZED RANKINGS: For the purposes of this analysis, we converted each site's rankings to a "standardized rank." This is best explained by example: if the number of positions to be filled from a Rank Order List was three, then the first three applicants on this List were considered to be "first choice" applicants and given a standardized rank of 1. The next three applicants on that List were defined as "second choice" applicants and given a standardized rank of 2. And so on.


PHASE I MATCH RESULTS BY
STANDARDIZED RANK NUMBER ON INTERNSHIP PROGRAM LIST

(Percentages may not total to 100 due to rounding errors)

Standardized Rank
Number of Applicants Matched
1
960
30%
2
748
24%
3
564
18%
4
348
11%
5
218
7%
6
148
5%
7
70
2%
8
42
1%
9
21
1%
10 or higher
44
1%
TOTAL
3,163
100%

To interpret this chart: Of all positions that were filled in Phase I of the Match, 30% were filled with "first choice" applicants (as defined above), 24% with "second choice" applicants, and so on.

Furthermore, 54% were filled with "first" or "second" choice applicants, while 72% were filled with "third choice" applicants or better.

Of course, comparing these numbers to applicants' Match statistics should be done with extreme caution, given the significantly different ways in how "first choice", "second choice", etc. were defined in each analysis.

 

Report Prepared by Greg Keilin, Ph.D.
and National Matching Services, Inc.
February 23, 2018