ExponentialDecay

@elmo_says Perhaps unsurprisingly, it's a lot easier to make it anywhere if you come from money. My issue with you is that you're perpetuating the mindset that gets people suckered into these programs in the first place. You dispel the notion that these programs are exclusive and what you need to succeed only to replace it with another similar one - actually, what you need for success is to be a "rich international type" with a PhD in engineering from MIT. (As an aside, I will never forgive you for that phrasing. As someone who works in development, you purport to help developing countries and then you turn around and disparage the very people coming from those countries, often(!) at great personal cost, to participate in that work and make sure that not just your imperialist perspective gets heard - how dare you). This is unhelpful for two reasons: because few people can will themselves into becoming a rich international type with a PhD in engineering from MIT, and also because it's bullshit. More people are funded in these programs than you think, not only via internal scholarships, but via external scholarships or by their government or employer. The money is out there and you can get it. It is good practice to get it now, because the public sector, if we come down to brass tacks, is fully about convincing different groups of people to give you money to do socially important things. The scheme for getting money is simple and the same for everyone: Get your hard stats in order Have work experience that you can make relevant (NB: this is an exercise in storytelling, not an exercise in asking Daddy to get you a position at State) Pay attention to fit: know what you can offer a program Apply widely Negotiate And if you don't get money, here's what you can do to build a successful policy career without a degree in public policy. I'll start with the other degrees you can get, but the rest of the list is more interesting and arguably more impactful. Get a degree in something else: business, area studies, economics, etc. The specific MPA/MPP title does not matter in 99% of cases. Get a degree somewhere else: Canada, Europe, Asia. The network at the top policy schools does help, but I also meet a lot of people who are tired of the cookie-cutter SAIS grads and want to hire people from new perspectives and experiences. GET A JOB. Get a job in the Parks and Rec department of Pawnee, Indiana. Get a job in the Kafkaesque government of your tiny third world state. Get a job at Goldman. Get a job at a tiny nonprofit. It's bullshit that you need to live in DC and work at State or the World Bank in order to do anything in this field. State and the World Bank are where impact goes to die. The real work and learning happens on the ground, often among people without advanced degrees but with lots of enthusiasm. I meet so many people in their late 20s-early 30s who are considered top in their field who graduated Podunk State and started their careers as low-level bureaucrats in flyover country. Most of them got their advanced degrees 6-8 years out of college; some don't even have them. Do your own thing. You don't need a degree to start a small business or an after-school activity for low-income children. You already know what your community needs, and I bet you're smart enough to figure out how to help them get it. This knowledge is more valuable - including to employers - than whatever Dani Rodrik will lecture at you for 2 years at Harvard. Do something other than policy for a few years. Lots of people come in from other backgrounds in business, health, engineering, whatever. Meet people. For my part, I am continually amazed at how many people in my dog-eat-dog callous and jaded field have taken their time, effort, and not infrequently money to help me out for nothing in return (although gratitude is a nice touch). So many busy and important people want to mentor and guide you (sometimes pay you) - but you do need to reach out. Most people get broken by this field eventually but few forget why they're even in this thing, and if you're a promising young person who has something to offer, they get really excited. There is such an incredible variety of policy careers and policy backgrounds. You don't need to be a rich international type to be in policy, and you don't need to follow a single prescribed path. If you're a young person with a bachelor's level education and some idea of how to position your perspective within the context of the field, you have so many opportunities to work, travel, and make an impact. It's a shame to chain yourself to a DC office job straight out of college.

srs question, if you're interested in international policy, why did you go with Trachtenberg and not Elliot? Anyway, both your schools are about as strong as each other and honestly having an international specialization will have little to no impact on whether or not you get an international-focused job. If your concerns are around specializations, I wouldn't worry - they don't matter.

Gathering data would take more time than I'm willing to donate, but it's not that rare to make in the upper five figures to low 6 figures. Some examples of jobs (this is going to lean on the economics/quantitative side, but idk how much of that is the true mean vs my occupational bias): private sector consultants (will vary heavily by company, but ~70k is doable early-mid career) technical staff/senior operational staff at multilaterals upper GS grades in Fed government (if your agency does its own pay scale, you may earn as much at lower GS grades, or cap out at figures like 200k) Sometimes nonprofit management or upper level administration positions in industries considered less lucrative, like education, can reach 6 figures - depending. But generally, the difference between this degree and an MBA (which I wouldn't call a technical degree, lol) is that the job spectrum, and hence the salary spectrum, is really broad. You can position yourself to get a high-paying job (this positioning should start before the program, otherwise you can get yourself on track to a good job with an ~entry level position), but you won't be shepherded into it along every step of the way. With a candidate at a top MBA program, employers know what they're getting: some passable raw intelligence, a good degree of professional and socioeconomic socialization, and strong prior work experience in a relevant industry or at least a relevant role (career outcomes for people from low-ranking MBAs, btw, are pretty bad). With policy candidates it's a bit of a mixed bag (not least due to the sheer number of weirdos out of undergrad in these programs). Plus, I'd wager that most people don't get policy degrees because they want to make bank. If your goal is to make a lot of money, not to be idealistic, but why are you here? Regarding you specifically, you just seem a little lost. What's your career goal? I think especially for someone with 10 years in the workplace, going into any professional program without a clear (but not restrictive) trajectory, maybe a 5-10 year plan, is not a good idea. If that's coming across in your applications, it might be why you're not getting money. You're kind of jumping around from policy to business to unnamed technical programs without rhyme or reason. If you just want to get a higher salary, there's ways to do that without upending your entire life. For that matter, if you want to have an impact in the policy world, there's lots of way to do that that don't involve policy or business school.

so pay for it with savings.

Harvard is the stronger brand, but it's not 60k+ in loans stronger. Especially if you're doing anything besides MPAID. But also 60k isn't ruinous so if you're that committed to HKS, go. I just wouldn't because it's not necessary.

Full ride at Georgetown >>>>>>>> HKS

Looks awesome! I think this will be a great resource for future generations. @rising_star sticky?

Can you check with someone who verifiably has a job as a military analyst in real life? Most people here are applicants or not in your field (not your field specifically - any field). I was in the OP you posted previously and the guy with 15 years military experience seems to have unequivocally told you that getting a degree in security from anywhere that isn't a war college won't make you more qualified to be a military analyst. I think this forum is great for researching programs and how to handle applying, getting moral support and occasionally education-specific advice, but I wouldn't ask for career advice on here. I don't know who anyone is on here, but I suspect that few people here have enough experience to develop worthwhile insight - but there are a lot of well-meaning folks who talk a lot of total bullshit.

SAIS is a professional program. It explicitly does not prepare students for PhD, there is no required research component, and to my knowledge, you cannot do a thesis - honors are granted via an oral exam. Some people do go on to PhDs, mostly in public policy (which is a different field from political science), but they need to put in the extra legwork in getting the right preparation and research experience because again, this is not what the program is for. Columbia, on the other hand, is a cash cow. Rock and a hard place. What specific weaknesses are you hoping to address in a master's? I would urge you to consider area studies programs if that weakness can be addressed in them because they are slightly better-funded. I would also urge you to apply in Canada. You can do just as well with a master's from a competitive Canadian institution, and you'll save $$.

Please don't take this as advice (I don't even know what warfighting is), but my general sense from my own career is that the mere fact of an institution teaching something doesn't indicate that the qualification will be respected by people in that field. Anyway, I always thought that the way you get into intelligence is by joining the army. but what do I know.

I'm not how the debate devolved into a shitstorm about what Ivies are known as Ivies, but, speaking specifically to the Brown MPA: Generally in policy hiring, either the name of your MPA institution matters a great deal or it doesn't matter at all. The prestigious schools in policy are Harvard Kennedy, Princeton Wilson, Chicago Harris, Columbia SIPA, Johns Hopkins SAIS, and Georgetown (I don't know which specific program bc they are outside my professional area, but in their professional area they are good). I'm probably forgetting a couple and some otherwise non-prestigious schools may be well-regarded in niche specializations, but that's the list and basically I'm saying that Brown is not on it (for now, perhaps - but idk that Brown has the precedent to become a policy powerhouse). Taking those two priors, if you're aiming for a prestige-oriented career, getting an MPA from Brown won't help you, and if you're aiming for a career where prestige is not a factor... getting an MPA from Brown won't help you. If they're covering a substantial proportion of your costs and you like the program, go. But I wouldn't pay physical money, out of pocket or loans, to attend.

No advice, just a curiosity - why is an online for-profit school the closest thing to a war college?

I was thinking more like, people could input the programs they got admitted to and the funding they received, since that's more informative than "some funding", which is going to be the input for most of those cells, but this is cool too i guess

1. funded offers from other schools 2. being a really attractive candidate and not forgetting to negotiate the offer, even if it is already very high

they're all willing to negotiate if you have leverage

Thanks, OP, for taking the obvious one! It may be more helpful to start a google sheet like they have on the philosophy board, where people put the name of the school and their award (including 0 values, for frequency calculations).

lol dating in DC. Which one is cheaper? Go to that one. I am tired of saying this shit over and over in all the threads.

This is a little late, but if you have a serious interest in data science, why aren't you applying to data science programs? That's where you'll have a chance to get a really deep look at the hard skills (although some people will tell you to stop fucking around and get an Ms in Statistics, and they may be right). You can apply them to whatever you want once you're out.

Same as SAIS. But keep in mind that I'm just one person. The joke is, there's a pipeline underneath SAIS to the WB, and there's a grain of truth in it.

I don't know how all GPs or areas of development work but have reason to suspect that they operate on discrete value systems, so ymmv. From my contacts I hear that SAIS graduates a highly differentiated cohort of students where the average is unimpressive (which I'm ready to believe, given the class size and the fact that you can pass the economics requirement by taking undergraduate-level courses). I never hear anything about Fletcher. In my understanding it's a diplomacy program, ergo not very relevant to what multilaterals do. That said, it depends on what you want to do...

@elmo_says I don't think I'm being critical of these programs. I'm being critical of the decision to take out 100k to attend one of them. From what I recall of your post, I disagreed with your proposition that only rich international types can afford a career in DC and the many other similarly ridiculous generalizations you made. Policy masters are useful and teach useful stuff. Some specific policy masters are a pipeline into certain careers, and if you want one of those careers, it's not a bad decision to attend one. It's a bad decision to pay 100k for one because, in the careers they prepare you for, you will never pay that investment back and because it's an investment you never need to make. In the real world, policy or otherwise, your value is in what you can do really well or in who you know. In my view, if you want to learn to do something really well, you should specialize as much as possible in that thing. That may mean a degree, or it may not. If you have a compelling reason for why a policy master's will teach you to do something really well (who am I to know all the use cases?), by all means - but I struggle to see how anything cannot be taught for cheaper. If you want to know people, meet people. Work with people on real deliverables, not as a student in school. The notion that you can't have a career in policy without a policy master's, or without a prestigious policy master's, is bullshit. If anything, people from non-traditional backgrounds - STEM, entrepreneurship, the private sector - are considered more attractive by policy employers than career bureaucrats because they have experience on the other side of the table. They can put themselves in the stakeholders' shoes. When it comes to design, the bottlenecks are often surprising - and not so easy to see unless you're directly affected by them. It's also bullshit that these schools don't give out significant funding. If you're competitive, you'll get money. If you aren't competitive at this stage, you will struggle later (a struggle that can be overcome, but do yourself a favor and overcome it ex ante rather than ex post). This is a good lesson to learn early: don't work for free, and don't pay to work. You want to be somewhere where your time and your contribution is valued, because those places will invest in your potential and not just use you and throw you out. This is also why I say don't go even if you can afford 100k out of pocket: education is an opportunity, not a consumable. A place that is interested in paying your way is interested in giving you opportunities (and if you've ever had to fight tooth and nail for those, you will know the force behind that statement).

That would be relevant if your next promotion were to practice manager. How many newly hired E+ level staff in your GP are from SAIS?

You may be surrounded by SAIS grads, but I hardly hear anyone raving about it....

Chicago has a far better reputation than CIPA and you will be pulling your hair out after 2 years in Ithaca. It's 1 hour off the interstate! Psst if you are proactive, you can arrange any study abroad or internship opportunity you want, from any school.

I don't wanna call anyone out, but I gotta ask, what is this incredible opportunity you imagine you'll have access to once you graduate from one of these programs in massive debt? Because surely, at least once you're in the program, you see a lot of your classmates taking entry-level positions at or below minimum wage that don't quality for PSLF. What's your plan for paying off this debt? Do you have one? Because these degrees aren't worth 100k in any kind of money, loans or out of pocket, and the attitude (that used to be prevalent on this board) that you need one to go anywhere in this sector is bullshit. In fact, you almost never need a public policy degree these days because it's overly general in every sense: it doesn't confer much of a prestige bump compared to an MBA, and it doesn't teach you any technical skill. If you want to be a technical specialist, be it in cyber security or renewable energy or health, stop fucking around and get a real degree in CS, engineering, epidemiology, etc that will give you deep competencies. If you just want an office job in the public sector, you have two paths: if you really want to shell out $$ for a fancy piece of paper, get an MBA, because it's employable outside of this very narrow slice of the job market, or, if you just want an education that will open doors (which a lot of people taking on debt claim to), get one for cheap at a state U or part time or go to Europe, or... If SAIS or whatever is giving you a full ride, it's not a bad deal: it's a free chance to schmooze around DC. But otherwise, no hell no way. At the end of the day, this field is about having some substantial experience in a given policy field (through work, academia, or a combination), and public policy degrees are just a starting point. If you have nothing but the piece of paper to show an employer, you'll be stuck in typical office jobs, mostly support roles - and frankly, if that's your situation, I'm not sure what you're spiritedly fighting for. Those jobs aren't any more interesting, glamorous, or useful than their equivalent at Dunder Mifflin. The debt isn't worth even the chance to live your dream.