As per my experience, if you are targeting competitive schools then their ways of looking at your application is not standardized, its rather done in comparison to other applications they have received.
At least one component in your academic/career profile should have high ''general'' relevancy with the program you are applying to. For example, if you are not a masters in the field you are applying, then you should demonstrate that you have been employed into some civil service job before; any job which shows general relevancy to your program ''political science'' and ''specific'' relevancy i.e. area of interest which means your ''research proposal''....
Competitive schools can ignore ''specific relevancy'' but its difficult for them to ignore ''general'' relevancy.... If you present a research proposal with ground breaking idea then there are high chances of you being considered by your professor -- There are professor's scholarships too since they receive massive funds from industries --
I know an applicant who had applied to kings college London and had two gold medals -- one for his masters and one for M.Phill...
I had only one gold medal -- his application was refused for scholarship but was given admission and I was offered full scholarship -- we both had applied in different intakes
test scores are considered by schools but not all of them -- if your application lacks a basic component of consideration then test scores cannot rescue an application going into rejection stack