gradytripp

It ultimately depends on the individual instructors and the amount of work they give you combined with your own time management.  I have been through a grad program in another field and had plenty of time for other things, but now that I am switching to something more challenging, I will likely spend more time preparing for classes.  I read on old syllabus for a course I will have to take and it basically said to allot at least 6 hours of time outside of class per week for that particular course.  

Previous Schools (Name, type, or tier): Big 10 public undergrad (not one of the good ones, either...)
Previous Degrees and GPAs: Double major in Economics and PoliSci, 3.9 GPA
GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing): 170v/158q/5.5aw
Previous Work Experience (Years, Type): 6 months (immediately following UG) in a non-profit, 5 years enlisted military
Part-time Work Experience: Worked for the state Democratic Party for the 2006 midterms while in UG
Math/Econ Background: Lots and lots of econ w/ really good grades, not too much math - two stats classes, and then calc for business majors
Foreign Language Background (if applicable to your program): Biggest weakness besides my lack of an impressive academic quant history (A's in the ones I took, but didn't take very many or very difficult ones).  Studied Russian in high school and first year of college, but none since.  Trying to decide whether to pick it up again or go with something different.
Intended Field of Study in Grad School: Strategic Studies
Long Term Professional Goals: IGO, US government (if they'll start hiring again!), or NGO/think tank
Schools Applied to & Results:
Accepted: Georgetown McCourt School of Public Policy, Columbia SIPA, Johns Hopkins SAIS, UC San Diego IR/PS
Rejected: None!  I kind of wish I had applied to HKS or WWIS.
Ultimate Decision & Why: SAIS - A large part was just name recognition.  I always regretted following friends to the flagship state u instead of going to some much better UG schools I got into.  UCSD offered me more money than SAIS and San Diego is *awesome*, but I just decided I'll take the debt for the SAIS name, network, and location.  Also, I have the GI Bill which severely dampens the blow  Also, the strategic studies program there is top notch!
Advice for Future Applicants:
Don't leave your essays for the last minute!  At least my experience was that they are *MUCH* harder than you'll think.  I'm generally a pretty good writer and the policy writing samples weren't really an issue, but the personal statements kept me up at night, shaking and crying myself to sleep.  That Breaking Bad scene where Walter White is laughing hysterically under his house after learning all his money was gone?  That was me trying to write my personal statements.
 
Super excited, though!  I remember reading about SAIS while still in UG and thinking it sounded so cool but I probably wouldn't get in.  I kind of planned to go to law school when I got out of the military and just wasn't all that excited about it at all.  Then, maybe 2 years ago, I spoke w/ a friend who did his MPP and realized I'd rather go that route, then when I started looking into schools I remembered all about SAIS and here I am.  Even more excited given the fact that I'm stuck delivering pizzas until August

Previous Schools (Name, type, or tier): top Polish business school
Previous Degrees and GPAs: Quantitative Economics, 3.6
GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing): V155, Q168
Previous Work Experience (Years, Type): N/A
Part-time Work Experience: extensive experience in private (banking, consulting), public (diplomacy) and NGO sectors including entry-level as well as senior positions
Math/Econ Background: basically my whole BA degree was about math and econ
Foreign Language Background (if applicable to your program): German, Polish
Intended Field of Study in Grad School: Public Policy
Long Term Professional Goals: Energy Policy
Schools Applied to & Results:
Accepted: Georgetown MSPP MPP, SAIS MA, SIPA MPA
Rejected: HKS MPP
Ultimate Decision & Why: SIPA, because of its excellence in energy policy as well as an opportunity to take courses from other top-notch schools (e.g. CBS)
Advice for Future Applicants:
Believe in yourself. If you have a strong feeling that it is right time for you then you can apply despite of the fact whether you are straight from undergrad or not. Naturally, it would be great to have an extensive work experience when you enter your graduate program but if your undergrduate institution allows you to do this you can work while studying and if you are smart enough you can advance earlier than your peers. 

Sure, you could apply now and if you get a good offer go, or just wait a few years to apply again.  It will cost a few hundred dollars and be annoying, but there is nothing to stop you from doing so.

While it's clear that this is an option, I think it's probably not a great idea. Applying to schools should be taken rather seriously, and taking the GREs or asking for recommendation letters, etc. is something that you really only want to go through once. I frankly think it's a waste of time and money if you already know that getting work experience first is going to help and get you better funding.
 
More importantly, you can get all the feedback you can get back from admissions committees through their decisions by doing the work of researching these programs, talking to professors/staff at programs you are interested in, current graduate students, alumni, and generally tapping your network for information and advice. 
 
In high school or even college, there's some sort of distinction to being young and precocious. You can skip grades, or put in your time and just get out; it's not as important because it's more or less for a piece of paper so you will be hireable (high school more so than college, obviously). I used to think that grad school was just another step up on the ladder, but graduate school is very much optional. You do it for yourself, not other people. You get more out of it if you bring a lot to it, and full-time work in the real world changes you a lot. Just because you can get in and out before the age of 23 doesn't mean it helps you. Especially when you're going for a professional degree, I do not think it will be an advantage to be the youngest person in the room.

I am pretty sure this is NOT true. You have the option of sending schools your scores from a test you took one day and not another time (meaning there's no disadvantage to retaking the test), but you send them the scores from one single day, not section-by-section. 

Honestly, the best thing to do is just to go through the websites of the APSIA member schools and see which schools offer strong programs in your field of interest.  Don't just look at the specialization, but do they have research centers that interest you? Do they sponsor publications/journals on refugee/humanitarian problems? Do they have Faculty members you recognize from your own research in the field?   Another good idea is to go to the websites of some organizations where you could imagine yourself working and read the bios of the people there. What schools did they go to and what did they study? 
 
Speaking generally, MPP/MPAs are more professionally oriented; MAs tend to be more focused on research.  But some schools have their own specialized degrees (like the MALD at Fletcher, the MIA at Columbia, and the MSFS at Georgetown), which are still professionally oriented. Whatever the degrees are called, in most cases the programs are really about 95% similar, so don't get too hung up on the specific letters.  It's really about the curriculum and support that you want. 

Hi all. I'm a recent college grad considering an MPA program in the future and am wondering if working for conservative organizations will in any way affect my chances of admission to the top programs.
 
I've looked over the WWS student bios and have noticed that their work experience tends to be non-partisan or left-leaning. Right now I'm working on a political campaign for a Republican candidate and am worried (perhaps paranoid) that it might adversely affect me.
 
Sorry if this has been covered before. I've only briefly lurked this place.

Will you have undergraduate debt?  How do you plan to finance your graduate studies?  Do you have experience earning money, having taxes/social security taken out, and living off of what's left over?  If not, you should spend some quality time with someone who has and/or an online budgeting tool to get a good picture of how loan payments can affect your standard of living after graduation. 
 
The career options your list are not especially high-paying.  For example, if you start out as a federal employee with a masters degree and no real full-time work experience you'll be making about 55k/year.  After taxes and social security, you'll be left with somewhere around 40k/year.  If you want to live in Washington or another expensive city, it'll be manageable on 40k/year, but that'll be a lot more difficult if you're paying $600-900/mo in loan payments like you'd have to if you take out $60K-$80K in loans.  Also, even if you think that's manageable, consider that 100k in loans with a 10-year repayment at 6.8% interest equals a $1,150/mo payment and, with the interest you actually end up paying $138k.  That's a house in some parts of the country and at least a decent chunk of a condo in a place like DC.  The opportunity cost is higher because if you invested that $1,150/mo in a fund with a 10% annual return, you'd have $237k after 10 years.  Even if your investment only hit 5% a year, you'd still end up with $179k in the bank after 10 years.  So, not only are you paying $138k, you're not saving or investing that same money, so you're losing out on interest and investment gains.
 
You've got impressive stats, and it wouldn't surprise me if you get in to some great programs.  However, your lack of professional experience will also hurt your competitiveness for funding.  So, you might consider casting a wider net when you apply to increase your chances of getting funding somewhere, so you don't start your professional career under a mountain of debt.  Certainly apply to top-tier programs, but maybe check out the next rung down, too.  Getting a full ride at a top 10-20 school could open up more doors than a top 10 education with crippling debt that limits your options since you have massive loan payments. 

Hello,
 
I figured I'd reply to this since I graduated from this exact program. Asking why it's special is tough to answer. I think someone else answered accurately, if a bit bluntly, that it's not.
 
There are many Public Policy programs around the country, and while UMD boasts its proximity to DC as a huge advantage, the truth is there are a handful of schools in the area that also have that advantage, and UMD's national ranking (US News and World Report) is not high. However, I think many people rightfully point out that US News and World Report's rankings shouldn't be taken as gospel. All I can give you is my opinion having graduated from the program, which I will gladly do.
 
I entered the program in the Fall of 2011. I had graduated from undergrad with a political science degree in December 2010, and spent the 8 months before entering UMD substitute teaching and volunteering. UMD offered me the most money and a part-time assistantship, which was why I went there. I was surprised how big the incoming class was, around 150 if I recall correctly. I waffled between the Social Policy and ISEP concentrations, ultimately deciding on ISEP.
 
Overall, I found the courses to be a bit disappointing for graduate curriculum. While the econometrics/statistics and program evaluation courses I took were probably the most beneficial, I had already taken both in undergrad and found them to be repetitive and overly simplified. Perhaps these courses were new to some, but I minored in econ in undergrad and went over the exact same material before even getting to grad school. Honestly, by the end of the program I didn't feel like I had learned anything exceptionally beneficial to prepare me for a career in the policy world outside of the courses that essentially just refreshed what I had already learned in undergrad.
 
As far as internships, I did two during my time at UMD (one with a think tank, the other with the State Department). I think the amount of internships relative to our field is the most beneficial thing about being in/around DC. This is the only advantage I'd give to the DC area schools over others like Syracuse and Indiana.
 
My real beef with the program came after I graduated in May 2013. I guess I was convinced that a Master's and 2 internships under my belt would nearly guarantee me a job. I was wrong. It's currently May 2014, I've applied for almost 200 jobs since graduating and I still haven't secured full-time employment. My issue is that I feel as though the program mislead entering students into believing employment from this degree was strong. In the school's atrium they show a pie-chart displaying where alumni work, but they don't show you those unemployed (not surprising). I attended the school's career networking night this most recent February, and it was like a gathering of the haves and the have-nots. Sure, some graduates are doing fine and living out their dream working for their favorite government agency or think tank. However, there were a good chunk of people like me who had not secured employment yet either. Some of these people had 4.0 GPA's, solid internships under their belt, etc and were still unemployed. After speaking to some school officials at the networking night, I came to find out that the employment rate for 2013 graduates was hovering around 60% 9 months after graduating. However, this already low percentage is still misleading because many people enter the program already working full-time jobs, they're either doing the program part-time or full-time at night. To count them as 'employed' after graduation is misleading because they were already employed while in the program. Who knows what the real employment number is if you take those people out of the equation.
 
Here's what I've learned: this degree, on its own, has almost no value. My lack of work experience is what's killing me, and the degree itself is not valuable enough to secure employment. I would strongly urge you to avoid this program unless you have a decent amount of prior work experience. The private sector employers I've interacted with directly (mostly consulting firms and think tanks) either don't know what the degree is or believe it to be less valuable than a degree in economics or finance. The public sector employers I've gotten to respond have told me that they're bogged down with applications to the point that they only consider those with the highest qualifications, mostly stemming from prior work experience or Ivy League schools on their resume.
 
I'm sorry if it appears that all I did was bash this program. Truthfully, I blame myself for my current situation to a large extent because I should have tried to gain work experience before going to graduate school. I also made some great friends during my two years at Maryland, and generally those admitted are very knowledgeable and passionate about the various policy issues they plan to work on. However, the point that I cannot escape is this: if the degree were truly valuable I would not be in the position I'm in. I've done everything right, had the career center office and outside HR people look at my resume/cover letter and been told that it looks fine.
 
Interpret this however you please. Maybe it's a warning, maybe I'm an outlier. The old adage of "it's who you know, not what you know" definitely applies to the policy field and if you make the right connections during grad school it's possible that you'll be set for life and end up fine. Just don't expect those connections to come from professors in this program, all of the ones I've spoken to tell me they hear this story from a lot of former students and wish they could do more to help. Best of luck if you end up at GWU, I hope your story doesn't end up like mine has.

I want to reflect what Gov2School has noted here, because it's pretty important. The remedy to your low undergrad GPA is not really more years of work experience, though that can only help; it is to take graduate classes in public policy, statistics, microeconomics and/or calculus and get As in them, whether you end up with a certificate or not.
 
I think it will also be important to them why your undergrad GPA ended up so poorly and what classes your worst grades were in. For example, if you did a biology undergrad, and got some Ds and Fs in organic chemistry or neuroscience, that's not exactly exciting, but you know, they won't necessarily take that as a sign you can't do econ analysis. If they were in math and econ courses, then there's no way you'll get into school unless you show you can do those classes again and much more excellently. It helps if you have a reasonable explanation for your poor academic record at that time -- family or illness, and I think they are open to that sort of thing, but only if you're over that hump now. It will also help to have a good and recent academic reference (maybe from taking those grad classes!) as yet another data point to testify to how good you are at doing the work now. As a side note, you may consider asking the staff, as someone else mentioned, and they can tell you how they weigh the GPA in their applications or what may alleviate a bad GPA for a certain candidate.
 
Otherwise, your professional work sounds like a great beginning, and I think if you can take at least 3 classes in the areas I mentioned and receive As, you will have a chance at getting into some schools, though maybe not with funding. And good luck! 

It will be very difficult to offset a GPA as low as yours, but it is possible. As stated by another poster, they need more data points in order to try and evaluate you as a candidate. You should focus on stuff that you can control, such as your rec's, your sop, your GRE scores (a high GRE score wont get you in, but it will help offset the low GPA). Make sure to tell them why you had those low grades. That being said, if you are BS'ing within the essay, adcom's may be able to catch on that.
 
As for the programs you are thinking of applying to, I dont want to be too harsh but I dont see any way of getting into them (at least right now) with your current GPA. Think of it like this, why would they accept you over someone that has an equivalent (maybe slightly less, maybe slight more) years of work experience but someone who has a much higher GPA. You also have to take into account that the average GPA of someone admitted is a 3.6/3.7 so there is a huge deficit there. You would be better served either a) Working for a few more years as well as doing a graduate certificate and then applying or Do a graduate certificate and the apply to more realistic (2nd tier I guess) schools. The more years of work experience that you have when you apply, the less your UGPA matters, hence my advice to work more and then apply. 
 
Hope this helped!

Yikes! I'll be blunt but I seriously doubt you could ever get into any of those schools. Work hard, improve your apps, ace the GREs, get the grad certificate with perfect grades then apply. Alternatively, you could contact some schools and ask them directly if they've ever admitted anyone with a 2.24gpa. Why you may not have a chance at places like Harvard, there are some decent second-tier schools that might give you a shot if you're willing to work hard for it.

Adam, I'm completely with Gradytripp on this one. One thing you are overlooking, however, is that you can attempt to leverage the offer from Kentucky to get more money from Maxwell. It's a delicate process, but it never hurts to ask as long as you are polite, direct, and humble without being beseeching, whiny, or accusatory. I wrote a blog post that outlines how you can ask for more financial aid. Might be helpful!
 
http://theartofapplying.com/sample-email-to-request-more-fellowship-aid/

Previous Schools (Name, type, or tier): Top 20 LAC 
 
Previous Degrees and GPAs: B.A., Political Science, 3.8
 
GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing): V 169/99th, Q 153 /55th, W 5.0/93rd
Previous Work Experience (Years, Type): 5 years, highly relevant government work experience, but in entry-level positions
 
Math/Econ Background: Intro Macro/Micro in college (took intro Micro pass/fail), one Stats class at a night school that I took the fall I applied 
 
Foreign Language Background (if applicable to your program): a little French and Arabic from college, but not fluent in anything and very little opportunity to practice since leaving undergrad
 
Intended Field of Study in Grad School: Middle East foreign policy/national security issues 
 
Long Term Professional Goals: Leadership positions on foreign policy/national security issues. 
 
Schools Applied to & Results: Applied: SIPA, WWS, HKS, Georgetown MSFS, and Tufts MALD.  Accepted at all five.  Very big fellowship at SIPA, $22k/year at Tufts,  full tuition plus stipend at WWS. No $$ at HKS, but since I knew I wanted to defer I did not apply for some fellowships that I might have been eligible to receive.  No $$ at Georgetown (and they required a Microecon and a language course before I could enroll). 
 
Ultimate Decision & Why: WWS.  While the offer from SIPA was huge and completely unexpected,  after visiting my top three (HKS, SIPA, and WWS), it was clear where I really belonged.  The SIPA fellowship made it a tight race between SIPA and WWS, but in the end I liked that WWS students were a little older and more experienced (about 20% of the SIPA entering class is right out of undergrad).  I also decided that while WWS is a smaller program and doesn't offer the same huge variety of coursework, the smaller size would also mean a lot more personal attention (not just for classes, but also career services, extracurricular activities, etc).  Plus, after attending admitted students day, I felt that a lot of my concerns about the size of WWS were put to rest. I'm confident I can pursue my interests there, even without 50,000 courses to choose from. 
 
Advice for Future Applicants:  As others have said, take your time and start early.  I was surprised how time consuming the application process was, and I'm glad I set myself an initial deadline to finish everything by Thanksgiving.   Also, take advantage of suggestions/resources available to give you an idea of what the admissions teams are looking for.  READ THE SCHOOLS' BLOGS, they often have useful tips that are universally applicable.  HKS' admission blog was really helpful when I was writing my personal statement, because their posts on personal statements spelled out clearly what they did/didn't want.   Also, if you are working, don't be afraid to enlist the assistance of coworkers and supervisors.  I was very open with them about my plans and they gave me some of the best advice and guidance. They even allowed me to leave early one day per week so I could take my stats class.  Don't feel that you have to keep it a secret that you're applying. You'll need all the support you can get. 
 
Think seriously about all of the little costs involved in attendance that can really add up, beyond tuition.  Housing, food, transportation to/from school, transportation to/from internships (and housing/food at internships), definitely research what support schools provide in these areas.  All of that can add up to another big loan (I appreciated that WWS provides a lot of support for activities like internships and business travel, one of the reasons I picked them).  
 
My biggest piece of advice is that you shouldn't be afraid to wait.  Going straight from undergrad to a professional masters program doesn't necessarily convey a benefit in the job market.  Take your time to work and explore your field before committing yourself financially.  That will help a lot in determining where you want to focus your applications (I ended up applying to schools that were well represented in the places that I've worked).   It will also give you a more clear story to tell.  Given my thin quant background and low quant GRE scores, I was pessimistic about my chances for acceptance and fellowships. But because I had a lot of job experience, I was able to write specific, detailed, relevant personal statements and garner strong letters of recc.  I think that really helped me when it came to both admission and scholarship offers. 

Previous Schools (Name, type, or tier): Top 10
Previous Degrees and GPAs: Economics BS, 3.6
GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing): 170 / 165 / 5.5
Previous Work Experience (Years, Type): 4 years - two domestic in the private sector, two abroad with an NGO
Math/Econ Background: Significant - intermediate-level micro and macro, stats, econometrics, advanced econometrics, multivariable calculus, linear algebra
Foreign Language Background (if applicable to your program): Intermediate-level French, survival-level local language abroad
Intended Field of Study in Grad School: Public Policy/International Relations
Long Term Professional Goals: International relations field, US-based (e.g. State Department, etc.) 
Schools Applied to & Results: Princeton Woodrow Wilson School (Accepted, full tuition + stipend), Harvard Kennedy School (Accepted, $0), Johns Hopkins SAIS (Accepted, $20k/yr)
Ultimate Decision & Why: WWS. It came down to HKS vs WWS, and I went with WWS not just for the money, but for what it represents - it seems the school is much more heavily invested in each of its students than at HKS. My impression is there's a ton of individual attention, career support, etc., and though I initially saw the smaller cohort size as a downside, I realized along the way that if the 60-70 people in your class are awesome (and they all seem to be), then it's actually a benefit to be able to get to know them all really well. 
Advice for Future Applicants: Work first!! I've seen other advice on here that says "you CAN go to grad school straight out of undergrad," and that's true, but unless you really, really know what you want to do, it's probably not a good idea. And even if you do know what you want to do (what I thought I wanted to do at 22 is still pretty close to what I'm planning now), I'd suggest going and doing it for a while, even if it's at a lower level, and then going back to school because you'll bring more to the table and be able to put your classroom experiences into the context of the working world you've seen. 

Previous Schools (Name, type, or tier):  Small university - poor ranking overall but a decent business program
Previous Degrees and GPAs:  3.25 cumulative, two Ds and a fail on transcript
GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing):  162/161/4.5
Previous Work Experience (Years, Type):  8 months financial advising internship, 1.5 years corporate finance, 4 years teaching English in Korea, travel writing in SE Asia
Math/Econ Background:  micro/macro, calculus, business stats (All As)
Foreign Language Background (if applicable to your program):  fluent Korean
Long Term Professional Goals:  International finance/econ in the government or multilateral sector
Schools Applied to & Results:  SAIS DC(Accepted), Georgetown SFS Asian Studies (Accepted off wait list), no funding from either program (unless you count the "generous" $3,000 summer internship/language fellowship that Georgetown offered.)
Ultimate Decision & Why:  SAIS - I like the heavy quant aspect, many of the professors and the career services dept.  
Advice for Future Applicants:
 
If you have a poor undergrad transcript/GPA then being older definitely helps!  You can get into the best programs but don't expect funding from them.  
 
I didn't take college very seriously during my first two years.  However, after studying abroad I realized that I have a passion for international affairs and living/traveling overseas.  I repeated every class that I did poorly in and earn As in all of those during my junior and senior year of undergrad.  I ended up landing a job for a prestigious mutual fund corporation but realized very soon that the corporate rat race wasn't for me.  I bought a one-way ticket to Asia and ended up staying for four years.  I came back fluent in Korean and a desire to enroll in one of the best IR graduate programs.
 
Bust your butt on the GREs!  Everyone whines about the quant section but it can be mastered.  Just keep in mind that there are only so many types of problems, once you learn the tricks it becomes much easier.  For each problem there's long way to solving it and a short-cut.  Learn the tricks and short-cuts…they appear over and over again in all of the test prep and online practice questions!  I practiced thousands of sample questions.  Get into a routine of studying on a daily basis.  I liked going to Starbucks everyday after work and in the morning on weekends.  It's a great way to avoid the distractions you might encounter at home.  Once you feel comfortable with your skills, DO A FEW FULL LENGTH PRACTICE EXAMS!  The test isn't only about knowing how to do the problems but also how to manage your time wisely.  If you're like me and have a poor GPA, a good GRE score will help to offset it.  If you have a good GPA, a good GRE score will make you competitive for funding.  Oh, and Magoosh is EXCELLENT for preparing for the GRE Exam.  The Manhattan book series is excellent as well.
 
Show your passion!  I attended advanced level Korean classes on a weekly basis for over a year after I returned from Korea.  I found opportunities travel writing and volunteering in SE Asia.  I spent hours and hours writing a SOP that demonstrated my passion.  I made sure there wasn't a single grammatical error in any of my application materials.
 
Hope my experience helps those of you with weaknesses on your application.  Feel free to PM me if you need any advice!  Good luck to everyone!

Why not ask them? Tell them the specifics of your situation, that you want to go to their school, but would accept other offers if there's not really any chance of you getting in. Showing interest isn't going to hurt your chances, and you might get sufficient clarification from the schools to make your decision. 

Assuming you got full ride + stipend at WWS and little aid at HKS, then I think it is a no brainer in favor of WWS, as WWS is as good as or arguably better than HKS, depending on your preferences.
 
If HKS is offering significant funding, then it becomes a harder decision. HKS does have an advantage in terms of a greater number of course options, including the option to take courses at Harvard's other proffessional schools. The relatively limited course offerings is really the only shortcoming I can see with WWS. WWS has the edge in other areas, such as smaller class sizes and superior career services (from what I hear), and of course the big one being the ability to graduate with zero debt.

When it comes to policy schools, six figure debt is ludicrous -- regardless of the name. If I was you I'd be leaning towards Luskin, since it seems like UCLA is going to come through with sizable funding for you. La Follete also seems like another solid option. Ask for extensions from your choices if at all possible.

I agree with this assessment precisely and I can definitely tell you (I'm actually a career fed so I know what I'm talking about)from the federal government perspective that it doesn't matter where your advanced degree came from. For example, with the PMF program, I know people who are PMFS that went to Harvard and Princeton but I also know PMFs that went to state schools. The first review of any federal job application is only looked at by HR specialists and assessed on the core criteria in the job announcement. It isn't even seen by the hiring manager(who makes the final selection) until after the first review.  Thus, if you're fresh out of grad school but have less work experience than the other candidate, there's a good chance that you're not going to make the next cut in the hiring process.

My advice: as risk and debt averse as I am the Harvard name is worth it, that does not apply to any other school other than WWS, get in debt it will pay for itself.

How will it pay for itself?  If you mean it is 'worth it' in terms of experiences, networks etc, then maybe, but that doesn't translate into the cold hard cash you need to pay back your loans. The Harvard name won't get you higher pay for government work (see, for example, numerous posts on this board talking about govt hiring scales), and most non-profits in the field the OP is interested in don't have spare cash to throw around just for prestige - it might get you a couple of thousand extra in salary if you're lucky, but that's not going to make much of a dent in $100K+ of debt. HKS might get you better access to the top consulting firms, which will give you serious cash if that's what you want to do, but that's not what most people who do MPP degrees want to do.  

So, I tend to bang this drum quite a bit here, but I personally think that it's not wise to take out a lot of debt for an MA/IR, MPP, or MPA because the salaries in those jobs aren't that high and the rankings don't matter nearly as much as they might for an MBA or JD, for example.  A big part of my decision to attend LBJ was financial. I was accepted to a couple of DC schools, but with little financial aid. Between the higher tuition and higher cost of living in DC, I was looking at about $80,000 more over two years to go to school in DC. As much as I wanted to go to school in DC, I knew that I wanted to go in to government or NGO work and I just couldn't bring myself to spend $80k more to be in DC. On the other hand, between financial aid, working, my savings, and the lower cost of living in Austin, I graduated from LBJ debt-free which was a great feeling to have when I graduated since it meant that I had more options and didn't have to take the highest paying or first job that came along.

If you're interested in working for the federal government, where you go to school will have very little effect on your starting salary. The salary determination process is more or less an equation of education + work experience = GS level X, step Y. The brand name of a school might make a difference in opening doors at NGOs and make a small salary difference, but probably not a big enough difference to offset much extra debt since salaries are generally lower in the NGO/non-profit sector. If you've got your heart set on consulting, then the extra debt to attend a more prestigious program might be worth it, but if you change your mind partway through the program you could be stuck with consulting anyway to pay off the debt. If you come in to the masters as a mid-career student with a lot of work experience though, you could have a higher salary after graduation, so a larger debt payment might not be as big of a problem.

After graduation, I started working with the federal government at a little over 55K in DC, which is more or less average for someone with a master's and a couple of years of work experience. After taxes, social security, etc, I was left with a little less than 40k/year to live on. That's manageable in DC especially since I'm single, but if I had a large student loan payment like the $600-$900/mo payments you can incur if you take out $60K-$80K of loans or had a family, it would be really tough to live in the DC area on that. My salary has gone up a bit in the almost 5 years since I graduated, but it would still be tough if I had a huge loan payment every month. Without debt, I'm able to live comfortably, though not lavishly, save for future needs, and put away some money towards a down payment on a condo/house later on.

Also, being in DC can give you a leg up in networking, especially for the private sector and NGOs, but all of the big policy schools will have a decent alumni network in DC and the big employers of MPP/MPA/IR grads will hit the big policy schools. We had recruiters at LBJ from a lot of government agencies, several consulting firms, and many different international and DC-based NGO/Non-profits.  People in my graduating class went on to work at any number of federal agencies, UN orgs, think tanks, get PhDs, etc. and going to school outside of DC didn't really seem to hold anyone back.  So, while I was initially a little apprehensive about going to school outside of DC, I don't really think it hurt me in the long run. I got 2 great federal internships and then was eventually hired by one of them. Now, I'm in DC and have been able to take advantage of the LBJ alumni network here and build my own network through my current job and living in DC.
 
I'm not sure how much debt you'd be looking at, but 100k in loans with a 10-year repayment at 6.8% interest equals a $1,150/mo payment and, with the interest you actually end up paying $138k.  That's a house in some parts of the country and at least a decent chunk of a condo in a place like DC.  The opportunity cost is higher because if you invested that $1,150/mo in a fund with a 10% annual return, you'd have $237k after 10 years.  Even if your investment only hit 5% a year, you'd still end up with $179k in the bank after 10 years.  So, not only are you paying $138k, you're not saving or investing that same money, so you're losing out on interest and investment gains.

It's ultimately a personal decision, since everyone has a different tolerance for debt, but I generally don't think that a lot of debt is advisable or necessary for most MPP/MPA/IR grads since salaries are not usually that high. I also think that the name of the school, while not irrelevant, is not as important in the public and NGO/Non-profit sector as it is in the private sector. So, paying big bucks for a name brand is not as important as it might be for law schools or MBA programs. For example, a person that I met at an admitted student day for LBJ when I was trying to decide where to go ultimately turned down LBJ to go to HKS. We now work for the same employer, doing the same job with the same promotion potential, and my salary's actually a bit higher because I had a little more work experience before being hired. He has a ton of debt that he's trying to manage, but I don't.

I also think that, if you don't have a good match between program fit and financial aid, it is worth taking another year to work on your application package and/or research other schools. If you got in to top ranked program X with no funding, chances are good you'll get in there again or at least in to a similar program if you apply later. In the mean time, you can do things to improve your application package like trying to boost your GRE, improve your resume, improve your statements of purpose, etc. I would also strongly consider casting a wider net when you apply to schools the second time around because maybe you can get in to slightly lower ranked school Y with decent funding and have similar career prospects after graduation.  

It's going to be pretty unlikely (read: it won't happen) you'll be able to invest fellowship awards and earn anything close to a 10% interest rate, unless you play the stock market and manage to avoid getting burned. Rates are low now, and the amount you'll have won't be suitable for much, and you'll want access to it in 2 years' time at any rate once you graduate. This is just my opinion, but I would use as much liquid cash as you have (whether it be personal savings, support from family, stipends/outside awards) to first cover living expenses and then any tuition balance. Doing so reduces your future debt load and will mean that your overall debt will be lower (and accordingly monthly payments lower) and that you'll be in a better place to pay it off quicker or actually save money for the future when you have a job after your degree.
 
In general, anthropologygeek is right. Don't borrow more than you anticipate your starting annual salary to be. In a few rare cases, higher debt loads can be justifiable, but don't discount the impact it will have on your lifestyle. If you're carrying $100k+ in debt, you can pretty much forget about being able to save for retirement or a house (good luck getting approved for any substantial mortgage, even if you can swing a down payment), and it could very well mean you're chained to a job you are less than enthused about because you can't afford to leave. Do you want to still be paying off student loans 15-20 years from now?
 
On a tangential note, I would love to see the reasoning behind admissions/aids decisions. Applicants get into and get $ from School A, which is more prestigious and desirable than School B, which admits them with no $, and then School C, which is at best as well-regarded as School B, rejects them. Admissions is somewhat predictable, but I honestly believe getting merit-based funding/fellowships is more akin to a crapshoot than anything predictable. I guess the admissions and scholarship committees all weight GREs, GPAs, undergrad institutions, and work experience totally differently.