Match Statistics - 2026 - Phase I

2026 APPIC Match Statistics - Phase I

 

We are pleased to report that 3,513 applicants were successfully matched to internship positions in Phase I of the 2026 APPIC Match. A total of 44% of all applicants who obtained a position matched to their first choice internship program, 67% received one of their top two choices, and 81% received one of their top three choices.

A total of 845 applicants who submitted Rank Order Lists were not matched to an internship position in Phase I, while an additional 287 applicants withdrew or did not submit a Rank Order List. A total of 456 internship positions remained unfilled, of which 307 (67%) are in APA- or CPA-accredited programs.

Compared to the 2025 Match, the number of registered applicants this year increased by 289 (+7%). Over the past three years, the number of registered applicants increased by 690 (+17%) while the number of available positions decreased by 36 (-1%).

A total of 3,680 accredited internship positions were in the Match this year, a 3-year increase of 60 positions (+2%).

Statistics for all 28 APPIC Matches (1999-2026) are available on the "Match Statistics" page of the APPIC web site.

The 2026 APPIC Match statistics are provided below, in four sections:

• Applicants
• Internship Programs
• Doctoral Program Participation and Results
• Summary of Program Rankings

---

APPLICANTS

Each Position Was Ranked by an Average of 8.3 Applicants.

---

INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS

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.

NOTE: For comparison purposes, last year (2025) 781 sites received a total of 63,201 applications. Mean number received in 2025 = 81 (SD = 72.3), Median = 61, Range = 1 - 458.

NOTE: 34 programs at 31 sites submitted fewer ranks than the number of positions available. As a result, no ranks were submitted for 66 positions, which remained unfilled.

Non-accredited positions represented 7.3% of all positions but 32.7% of unfilled positions.

Included in the numbers for accredited sites shown above are 40 sites that were designated "Accredited, On Contingency". These 40 sites had 86% (117 of 136) of their positions filled in Phase I, with 33 of the 40 sites (83%) filling all of their positions.

Each Registered Applicant Was Ranked by an Average of 6.2 Different Programs.

---

DOCTORAL PROGRAM PARTICIPATION AND RESULTS

---

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)

To interpret this chart: Of all positions that were filled in Phase I of the Match, 31% were filled with "first choice" applicants (as defined above), 24% with "second choice" applicants, and so on.

Furthermore, 55% 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.