MasterPublicPolicy

True -- "safety" in the context of PhD admissions doesn't really exist. My advice: don't think of PhD admissions in the way you think of Masters or undergraduate admissions. Think of it as being more similar to applying to a job -- your "stats" certainly matter (GRE, GPA, transcript, etc.), but it's only a small piece of the puzzle. Just like with a job application, you definitely need to meet the minimum qualifications (and, for most PhD programs, it appears you already do). But once the minimums are met, the PhD process gets much more vague -- it moves into the realm of "fit." You'll meet with professors, and potentially even have an interview. They're trying to figure out if your interests align with theirs. Don't underestimate the importance of networking for this process. PhD programs like to play themselves off as highly meritocratic, but again, I think the process is much more similar to applying to a job. If your advisor from grad schools knows a potential PhD advisor at another school (maybe they studied in grad school together themselves!), then your advisor can definitely give his/her friend a call, and it will help your application. Talk to some of your professors who will recommend you. See who they know and what they suggest you do.

100% agree with this. Having recently finished my MPA, I can say for certain that those of us who got jobs at graduation had some prior work experience. Many of the students who went straight from undergrad to grad seemed to leave grad school with no better employment prospect than when they entered. The degree may be a qualification to get a foot in the door to a job, but it alone isn't going to land you an offer.

Also, since you did undergrad at Berkeley, you probably have a good chance of feeling out the program for yourself! Contact some professors and so on, and get a sense of the program's quant demands.

I second the CMU recommendation. Definitely very data-driven. Probably the best you can find. Another good recommendation is UC Berkeley Goldman. Not as explicitly data-focused as CMU, but still a quant-heavy curriculum.

Totally agreed here. I would also say that since GradCafes, like you said, are among the most prepared to begin with, they probably have friends and so on who have applied to much more competitive programs -- law, business, med school. I think that makes them misjudge how competitive MPP and MPA programs really are. They think they're comparable to MBAs and JDs, when really that's not entirely true, at least not from an admissions standpoint. So, yes, breathe!

You're welcome! My job search was fine -- I had a job before I even graduated! Granted, I don't work in a field where anyone would even think of having an MSW. I work in urban planning, so I can't see an MSW/MPA overlap being very common. Maybe in a human services agency it would be, though. I've heard the MBA thing as well. It's probably somewhat valid -- an MBA DOES give you more technical and marketable skills. But here's the catch -- it's a much more expensive degree, and many fewer people work in something like a nonprofit, especially one geared towards poverty alleviation/social justice/other MSW-things. So, I don't think it's at all the right fit, unless money isn't a concern at all. If you're going to take out a lot of debt for an MBA, then I don't see you being as likely to desire working in a nonprofit or something, where pay will be less. Further, I'm not even sure how marketable that would be, especially for a social justice-focused nonprofit. I think in those cases, an MBA might even be a turnoff.

Scary stuff. At any rate, taking out a gargantuan amount of debt in the hope that it will be forgiven later probably isn't something I'd recommend anyway. That said, this is potentially devastating if people who had expected this benefit aren't grandfathered in.

Totally not a stupid question. Having just graduated from an MPA program, I can say that people underestimate how "political" admissions to these programs can often be. Sometimes, students really do get in simply because they made the right connections at the right time. Obviously a certain bare minimum amount of qualification is still required -- but you have much more than just a bare minimum (that GRE score is really good for MPP/MPA programs). There were so many students in my program who had been around the area for a while, gotten to know an admissions committee person, and seemed to have gotten in (with funding!) through a route like that. Some others, too, had spouses/partners already enrolled in a program somewhere on campus, and the spouse/partner put them in touch with people to aid in admissions. Really, admissions isn't quite as meritocratic as we all think. That's not to say that just ANYONE can get in, but it's a simple fact that if an admissions committee member has met you and thinks you meet the requirements, they're probably gonna choose you over someone else with similar qualifications. So, go for it!

Not so much a response about your competitiveness, but have you considered Cornell CIPA? It sounds like that would give you the flexibility you want in terms of quant..

First, I can speak more to MPA's than MSWs, and I agree with TheCrow's comment -- what are your goals? If your goals are to manage a government agency and/or evaluate public policy surrounding justice reform, poverty, or something similarly related to social work, then I think an MPA will do you just fine. You'll gain the credible skills to do these kind of things. I'm not an MSW person (I have an MPA), but my understanding of an MSW -- irrespective of the concentration -- is that the degree is ultimately focused on direct service as a social worker. So, even if some people with MSW's ultimately do something other than become a social worker, most of your graduate school peers will be focused on becoming social workers. With an MPA, most of your peers will be focused instead on managing and evaluating policy from a macro level, which sounds like what you want to do. Just my two cents!