Putoots

I think you are an excellent candidate for a top MPA or other mid-career program. You have quite a long list of very relevant experience, which is not common for someone of your age (as many people spend a number of years doing random things -- or nothing -- after college). Your background definitely projects an image of someone dedicated to policy issues. I wouldn't get hung up on your grades. 10 years ago is a long time and more than enough time for personal and professional growth. However, since many programs base funding offers on the numbers, you should make sure to get a good GRE score -- at least 75% percentile in each section. (Especially in the quantitative section, which should make up for a less-than-stellar undergraduate performance.) As many people have said before, don't get too hung up on the brand names of HKS and Columbia. Despite the fact that these are top-flight schools, there are many other great schools that may offer you better financial packages. The University of Michigan -- known for its rigorous policy analysis curriculum -- has an MPA program designed for mid-career professionals, as does USC and Syracuse.

I'd also have to disagree with the concept of "too old for grad school," especially when you are talking about individuals in the 29-33 age range. Unlike the hard sciences or even the humanities, you will find people of all ages at professional schools. Although most students are somewhere around 26, you will find 22 and 23 year-olds as well as 29-31 year-olds. In one program I met a person 61 years old! Being older certainly has its benefits. An older candidate will most likely have work experience, professional contacts, and references. Having some depth and maturity can be an asset to some employers, especially in the public sector. Additionally, an older candidate may also have a clearer idea of what he or she wants out of the graduate program, and will therefore be able to angle the experience towards specific professional goals. Finally, a student who has spent a few years away from school is less likely to burn out, something that happens to a decent number of students who enter graduate school immediately following undergrad. I think the disadvantages usually come from the candidate. An older grad student may be less willing to take a low-paying or entry-level job after graduation because of familial or debt obligations, or simply because she doesn't want to be the 33 year-old "Junior Researcher." If the person has a spouse, placement may be limited to one or two cities, and a traveling may not be possible. True enough, there are a few junior officer programs at the UN and other places that have age limits, but that doesn't mean one can't get in to the organization some other way (usually after working for the federal government). I've never really heard of this "black sheep" idea, and I certainly don't think it should stop a slightly older candidate from advancing his or her career. I've worked in a large public organization, and although the young college-grads attract the most attention and have the most energy, they just as often make egregious errors -- both social and professional -- that their older colleagues avoid. I would think that this is also true for recent grads at the graduate level. (Full disclosure: I passed through the "young gun" phase of my career about 16 months ago and would now probably be considered a "seasoned veteran.")

I don't know the exact details of your situation, but my initial impression tells me that you will be okay. You are correct in thinking that the purpose of receiving your final transcript is to verify that you have completed your undergraduate degree, and not necessarily to check to see whether you've kept your grades up. I would just talk to the Director of Admissions and let him know that you had a rough semester but that you graduated and are looking forward to continuing the success you previously experienced before that last term (or something along those lines). The grades might raise a few eyebrows, but I don't think they'll rescind if you completed your degree. At this point they're just as committed to you as you are to them -- just work with them.

Admissions committees are not looking for perfection...they are looking for outstanding or unique candidates who will enrich a program. If the grade is an anomaly, and the rest of your application is strong, you have nothing to worry about.

Thanks for those words of encouragement! This is really tough. Technically I have until tomorrow night, so I guess I'll sleep on it for now. I'm hoping I'll wake up tomorrow with an "aha!" exclamation point over my head. I just find it funny that I was considering $70K+ in debt only a month ago, and now I'm disturbed by 40. I can definitely credit this board with feeding me a good dose of reality...something I will probably appreciate more 10 years from now.

I have finally managed to narrow my decision down to two schools: The Ford School (MPP) and Heinz at Carnegie Mellon (MSPPM). Today is decision day for me! I am interested in International Development and Humanitarian Aid, so I am leaning towards the Ford School. I attended their Spring Preview and was really impressed by the faculty, the students, and the design of the program. It seems very open and interdisciplinary...I'd love to take a class or two at Michigan Law. Heinz is a little more structured, and although I really like many of their course offerings, the international concentration seems less developed than others (this is usually the case for MPPs). Other than curriculum, the main difference is cost. I was offered a decent size fellowship from Ford, but Heinz has offered me almost double! The total debt burden for each, after two years, would look something like this: Ford: $45K Heinz: $23K Both programs seem doable in terms of cost, though Heinz is more appealing financially speaking since I'd be free to get a JD later on if I wanted to, whereas $45K would definitely take 7-8 years to pay off. I didn't get to attend CMU's welcome day but have done a bit of research about the program. Both have very strong career services and both have good placement numbers (CMU's is a little better, I think, but that is because of all of their private sector partnerships...something that doesn't really appeal to me). Both have a large alumni presence in NYC, which is where I hope to end up. I am a little frustrated because although I want to choose Michigan, I'd feel like a fool for not taking that extra $20K+. Are they really that dissimilar that $20K+ is worth going to Ford? Many people are telling me that the schools are close enough in curriculum and rank that it should really come down to money. [Oh, coming from California, both would probably be experiences in "culture shock," so region is not really a factor for me since, once again, they are similar.] Any help, insight, advice, or experience would help! Thanks!

Hello Cathy, You are right in thinking that Los Angeles is one of the best places to study labor issues. California is home to some of the largest, and most active, state and local labor unions in the country (I happen to belong to one: California School Employees Association). But it is also a hotbed of activist movements surrounding immigrant and other marginalized, non-represented laborers. I think you will find a number of opportunities to perform research on real-life cases in Southern California. UCLA also has partnerships with a large number of public sector and non-profit organizations in the area. Of the two -- USC and UCLA -- UCLA is definitely the more "activist friendly" program. I will be visiting UCLA tomorrow for their welcome day, though I admit that I will be keeping my eye out more for their international policy concentration (and opportunities in that realm), but just PM me for my general take on the program. I got into many of the same schools you did -- Michigan, UCLA, SIPA -- and right now I am leaning towards U Michigan, but I am on a totally different career track so take that for what you will.

For those of you who were admitted to SIPA (MIA or MPA), the acceptance letter said that a detailed financial aid offer would be sent a few weeks after. This was said to include loan information (if applicable) as well as any external or other funding that SIPA managed to match to the candidate. Did anyone get any additional funding this way? Or did the the majority of you receive only loan offers (in the form of a PLUS loan)? I received my acceptance letter last week, so I am a little behind. I did receive the generic cost estimate, but I think there is another letter coming. Just want to know what to expect...

Honestly, I think $30,000-$35,000 is pretty reasonable. Even if you are making $35,000-$40,000 for ten years, I think you can still make it work. Right now my top programs -- Ford and SIPA -- would leave me in debt $68,000 and $95,000 respectively, and I'm still considering them. But you have to think about your personal level of comfort. If you have lived debt free, and enjoyed the associated freedoms, then you may decide to continue living like that...free to leave the country, get that low-paying dream job and still live comfortably, or make a major purchase (house, car, etc.). On the other hand, if you feel that you won't be happy with the program, coming out debt-free may not be that beneficial if you don't get much out of it. At this point I would talk to GSPIA, tell them about your financial concerns, and see if they will work with you. You can always try to get more money, even if it is just work-study or something like that...

^ I sent you a PM. Let me know if you have any other questions. Also, for other people considering UCLA (is there anyone left on these boards interested in this program?) -- are you going to the Welcome Day on the 12th?

Is it possible to apply for some of these awards during your first year in a program? Most are talking about posting for the sake of next year's applicants, so does that mean many of these are only open to students entering (as opposed to continuing) a graduate program? I only ask because funding isn't really an pressing issue for me in the first year since I'm brining some savings, but second year will be tough. Any thoughts on second chances for external funding next fall/winter?

I don't mean to swing this discussion in another direction, but is there anyone else out there worried about the language proficiency requirement? (International students, this obviously doesn't apply to you.) I have a year of Spanish in undergrad, but that was a while ago (I was a freshman when I took those courses), and all of my traveling took place in the early part of the decade. I thought for sure they wouldn't take me because my language proficiency was pretty thin, but now that I am accepted I wonder if I will have to spend a good part of my time (and my summer) trying to catch up in language study. Anyone in the same boat? If not, I may reconsider this option...

I only applied to American (MPP) so I can't really comment on the specifics of programs, other than they are really different and have their own unique properties to consider. I think if you provided some of your requirements people would be able to provide feedback. I will say, however, that if you are simply looking at quality and prestige, all three of these schools are very good. Since you are dealing with three quality programs, it is best to focus cost and relevance (to your area of interest) over location and ranking. If any school offered you money, that is a huge plus, and something to weigh heavily (take it from a person who received very little funding).

I also received that email. I will also add that it said to respond to the email in order to express my continued interest in the program.

Well yeah, these are just Federal loans, so they are only going to give you what they expect you'll need for the year. This year they are estimating that the cost of attending GPPI will be roughly $61,000, of which just under $40,000 is for tuition. Does anyone know if tuition at private schools fluctuate as much as public? I'd like to be able to double this amount to estimate my total cost, which is something I dare not do for public schools...especially in California!

For those on the West Coast, I received my packet yesterday, along with a separate envelope with financial aid information. I live pretty close to Downtown Los Angeles so I get stuff fairly quickly. I was generously awarded $61,000 in loans. I did appreciate the handwritten note from GPPI's Dean of Admissions referencing my location and my proposed area of study. It isn't enough to make me take out close to $85,000 in loans, but it was a nice touch.

Well, for those of you still deciding between FSPP and other (potentially cheaper) schools, have you made any progress? I'm still at $75,000 in loans (if I get nothing second year), which is pretty daunting. I feel like I'm okay for the first year since I am bringing in savings and help from family. It is the second year that is driving up the costs. But I wonder...I didn't really try for external scholarships since I was so frazzled with applications, work, etc. But now that I see how important funding is, I wonder if it will be possible to apply for funding next Fall/Spring (external, federal, or other sources). I'd really only need about $10,000...and if I can get a research or teaching position one semester, I'm in really good shape ($60,000 is reasonable for me since that is what I expect to make after graduation...it is also within the threshold of what I'd be willing to carry with me to a PhD if I go that route later on). Any thoughts on whether applying for external funding while in the middle of a program is doable? Success stories from friends or colleagues? Also, has anyone talked to Ford to see how likely it is that people get teaching and research positions? And what kind of tips they have for being prepared to compete in 2011? I'll be attending the Campus Day or whatever it is called, so I can ask then... Thanks in advance for your responses!

I'm still waiting for an admissions packet or confirmation of my acceptance from the Graduate School. Is there anyone in California who has received a packet or any contact other than the first one from GPPI and scholarship?

Right now I'm looking at ~$95,000-98,000 without second-year funding, which is way beyond what I consider reasonable. However, if I could get somewhere between $17,000-$20,000 for the second year, I'd probably do it. $75,000 or somewhere around there is my upper-limit.

Wow Gazelle, I'm in your exact same position. I'm also deciding between IR/PS and SIPA...and FSPP, but that is a totally different discussion. For me, the main story is Cost vs. Name, though area of focus is also a factor. With SIPA, my focus would undoubtedly be political and economic development (coming from a project planning background in the public sector), and I really appreciate the way Columbia has developed its capstone project as well as the fact that I'd be able to focus not only on Latin America but also Africa (and perhaps Central Asia). Also, I'm sure that SIPA is a better gateway to more dynamic organizations because of the name and the location. With IR/PS, the low cost gives me more options in terms of what I want to study, which is nice because I don't have a "set-in-stone," specific job or organization in mind. For example, though I am interested in development, my academic background deals more with IR theory and politics, so the International Politics career track is very appealing. And that would also give me a solid research foundation (especially if I can secure a Research Assistant position) to go on to a Political Science or Political Science/Public Policy PhD without worrying about carrying mounds of debt. The same is true of the Public Policy career track, which would provide me with a diverse, well-rounded background to move on to a PhD program or other employment (in public sector or non-profit). In terms of a decision, I'm pretty stuck as well, though I may contend with your assertion about needing a car in La Jolla. I don't necessarily think you need a car, even though it would certainly make getting around easier. I do notice that IR/PS seems like it fosters a pretty tight-knit group of students, so I'm sure you'd be able to carpool to get places. Also, the reality is that, unlike NYC, there really isn't as much going on down there. (Having said that, I'm probably going to bring my bike, a constantly-breaking moped, and my dying Mitsubishi just in case.) --- Honestly, I'm leaning towards IR/PS, as much as it pains me to let go of a school that I've been wanting to go to for about 7 years. I'm looking at about $95,000 in debt if I don't get funding from SIPA in the second year, and that just seems like a ripoff considering I could get a PhD for the same price somewhere else (I find it troubling that on the SIPA blog they say that 70% of second-year students get funding, but on my acceptance letter it said the number was closer to 50%). But that isn't all. I think it is important to look at your personality, your level of motivation, and your work ethic before choosing a program. For example, I haven't really developed networking skills, which could severely limit the advantage of being at Columbia and NYC. I'm definitely more of a "smart and work hard" person, more suited to acing classes and being a meaningful contributor to a project than skipping study sessions for brown bag sessions and meet-and-greets. To succeed at SIPA, I think the key is getting involved more than getting good grades or being at the top of your class. In fact, I would argue that you probably only need to worry about grades the first semester (due to the funding issue). After that, the focus should be on building contacts, interning, and preparing yourself for employment. IR/PS is more insular, with many resources coming from within the university (through research) and through participation (through students groups). I think academic excellence will get you farther at IR/PS than at SIPA.

My response is coming purely from a practical point of view (i.e., what it really means in terms of marketability and transfer of skills). As you say, most public policy programs are very heavy in statistics and economics, and you will come out will a very technical set of skills. However, in speaking to former MPP students and those currently working in traditional "public policy" jobs -- like US GAO -- the odds of actually using your incredibly refined statistics and econ skills in any substantive way are pretty low. Where this becomes very useful is when public policy graduates go on to do PhD programs in the social sciences. MPP grads are usually way ahead in terms of research method training. Hope that helps...

For those of you who are seriously considering IR/PS (MPIA), I was wondering if you could shed some light on your background, expectations, etc. I originally dismissed my acceptance to IR/PS when I received it a month ago because acceptances to GPPI and FSPP pushed me towards public policy. But as I start to consider future jobs and curriculum, I realized that I am much more interested in IR. Having said that, I really don't know much about the program other than the packet I received and familiarity with UCSD's reputation as a top Political Science school. I'm a little concerned about IR/PS in terms of finding a job at a dynamic intergovernmental organization or research analyst position. Since we'll be competing with graduates from places like SIPA, Georgetown's Foreign Service program, and SAIS, will we be able to hold our own? It seems like IR/PS really works hard to support their students, but I wonder how far that goes. Is UCSD respected outside of California? Will organizations in NY and Washington, D.C. consider IR/PS grads? Or is this program designed to place people in the Bay Area's non-profit sector? (I'm not against that -- I went to Berkeley as an undergrad and love the Bay Area, but I'm just trying to manage my expectations.) Also, what are some of your planned career tracks? I'm torn between Public Policy (U.S. foreign policy), International Politics, and International Development. (I know those sounds really different, but there are some major overlap areas...like "Civil Society" and "Development and Applied Data Analysis and Statistical Decision Making.")

This has been a very interesting discussion...I'm definitely learning a lot about job prospects in various fields... I’ll give you my perspective after having worked in local public administration (I’m assuming there are a few MPP/MPA hopefuls who are considering public sector jobs outside of the federal government). For those without public sector experience, I’ll give you the money stuff first, but I also want to add something about quality of life. I’ve been with the Los Angeles Unified School District, the second largest school district in the U.S., doing project planning work for over three years (as an analyst). In the analyst series of jobs, which are generic entry-level professional positions, the salaries look like this: Admin Staff Aide ($39,900 for Step 1) Assistant Admin Analyst ($48,400 for Step 1) Admin Analyst ($59,000 for Step 1) There are usually 5 steps and each step raises ones salary by at least $2K (step increases occur annually). None of these levels require a Masters degree, though college grads usually enter as Staff Aides or Assistant Analysts and put in 2-3 years before they get promoted to Analyst. Lately, many have been coming in as Analysts right out of college and making $60K+ in just two years. The problem is that once you get to Analyst, or even Senior Analyst, you are in a bottleneck. You have to go back to get an MBA, JD, MPP, or M.Ed to get to that $100K-$120K+ range. Otherwise you are looking at analyst work or middle-management (at best) for 10-15 years...which may not be bad in terms of pay (it is possible to swing $80K+), but may not be rewarding. And that is what I want to emphasize. For those with ambitions of doing something exciting or dynamic, the public sector is kind of a gamble. I was lucky enough to enter the organization during a massive technical infrastructure project, and have never had to repeat the same task or mini-project twice. However, even now, my unit – just three years out of project mode – is starting to coagulate into yet another bureaucratic operation. My advice would be to consider compensation, yes, but also consider searching around for the right public sector branch or organization. MPP/MPA degrees provide flexibility, but that might not always be useful for quality of life. Just in case you find that you’re in a bottleneck – middle management or otherwise – and can’t get that executive position or high-profile project, it really helps to be doing something you enjoy so that the prospect of being there for the long haul makes you feel happy rather than depressed. (Those in the public sector will tell you that, because of step advancement, excellent benefits, the possibility of promotion, and the fact that it takes so long to finally get placement, public sector jobs are hard to leave.) The larger the organization, the more chances there are to move ahead, move around, and find interesting activities. But it also means there is the distinct possibility that you will get lost in the bureaucracy… [**Please keep in mind that these salary numbers are for Los Angeles, which has a considerably higher cost of living. You may not find this kind of salary range in other areas of the country.**]

It could be a close call because summer classes begin August 2nd. I wonder if they'd allow someone to take a similar class at a local university instead.

The three courses for summer prep are: Analytical Writing Quantitative Methods Economics You will get more information about cost and dates when you get your packet (congratulations!). Also, make sure to pay attention to whether the course is required or simply recommended (if there is more than one listed). I was originally put off by this provisional acceptance because it is just going to add to the cost of attendance, and especially because I didn't get anything like that from GPPI, FSPP, etc. But now I'm thinking it might be a good way to settle in before everything officially begins. A light sparring session before the main event, if you will....