GradSchoolGrad

Unless you have an outstanding personal reason to be geographically near one of the schools, LBJ MPP is a no brainer. You are coming out with no tuition debt + it is a great program for both applied + academic MPP + prestige + range of career options. If you had more funding at Harris, I think you can raise an argument, but you don't. SPA really doesn't have that much brand equity. McCourt has a great brand and good programming, but it has an awkward culture and overall management struggles. I would cross out Evans unless you really want to end up in the West Coast (regional pull).

I was an MPP student in the DC area and honestly, I never ever met an American University MPP or MPA student or alumnus (that I can remember) at any conference, learning event, research presentation (one of them was actually at American University), case competition, or internship. I met people from grad programs in Howard, George Washington, George Mason, UVA, Catholic University, and schools from outside of DC. Never have I heard people even talk about the MPP or MPA program from American University SPA. I always thought it was ironic because I would drive by the American University campus (and where SPA is) and wonder where their grad students are. My point is that if SPA MPP or MPA students are out there doing things and taking advantage of the DC environment, I have no idea how I missed them (and I am the type of person that talks to strangers all the time). If I were you, I would go to CIPA hands down by virtue of the brand equity + flexibility of the program.

Here is what I am concerned about and what I recommend you do. 1. Do not conflate social availability with career outcomes. What you said sounded a lot like some people I knew from my graduate program. My graduate program is internally appreciated for high accessibility of resources. Heck, I can even schedule an appointment with the Dean. However, being able to talk people and getting your project, academic, and career interests from grad school are two different things. I knew so much people from my graduate program (which went through a rebrand 7 years ago... not as dramatic as a brand new establishment) who had a great engagement but a terrible academic / career experience because the proper systems and legacies weren't in place to properly guide them. I recommend you talk to people at Jackson who are doing IDEV (I don't even think they graduated a full class yet... at most they have 1), and see what they have been academically focused on + where they are going. In particular international students from afflicted areas like yourself. 2. Being the first is not always a good thing. Being the first of something (especially in a small program) can also be difficult because people (fellow students and staff) don't have experience in working with your interests. Yes, you can hypothetically start something and create possibilities but to what effect? New Haven isn't exactly connected with a lot of IDEV activities going on. At best, you have a great relationship with your classmates, and do some interesting academic projects. However, you won't get much meaningful experience based learning (at least in New Haven... you might able to organize some travel activities when COVID ends). Also, for whatever reason, you don't like the small number of people you are stuck with, you don't have any other social / academic engagement options. You guys are pretty much stuck with each other. With SIPA, by virtue of numbers, there will be other people in similar situations that you can bond with. I say this because I was the one of many firsts in my graduate program (and we were bigger than Jackson, but still about 70 or so a class). I was the first male who tried to be actively involved in the women's organization (been a women's groups' supporter for many years). I was the first who previously was an instructor at a college. I was the first person trying to do research on men's labor issues (there is actually a lot going there). I found it super frustrating that the staff and classmates were only used to cookie cutter situations and had no idea how to support me and honestly didn't care about my experience or opinion because they had no idea what to expect. Luckily, I was able to find activities in Washington, DC and my greater University whereby I could get involved in things and meet people that were able to support me. 3. There is a lot to be said about learning how to navigate New York. Yes, SIPA, Columbia, and New York can be kind of impersonal. There is a lot of bureaucracy. People are not always the nicest. With undergrad, I would totally say its normal to have a nice nurturing environment. For grad school, I think there is a lot to be said about learning how to navigate the bureaucracy and chaos to get things done. It will make you stronger coming out of it. 4. Classrooms interaction quality. It is also my understanding that Jackson has traditionally a younger class cohort (correct me someone if I am wrong). SIPA has a greater diversity of age. With 7 years work experience, I don't know how excited you are to go to school with people with mostly 0 to 3 years of work experience.

Okay got it. In that case, I think the real question for you is to consider if the SEAS/Ford brand is worth it + what avenues are there for you to get published (thesis or separate endeavors... you would have 3 years anyway). Also... something else to think about. I am assuming your scholarship came from one side of Michigan (like one of the schools???). I have heard stories of dual degrees in Michigan doubled dipping. As in seeking scholarships from both schools, and thereby boasting their total. That is something to think about. My entire point is that for research to really gain career value for someone who sounds like wants to go back to being applied is to be published or part of crazy project that gets some level of publicity (good example is the University of West Virginia team that uncovered how Volkswagon was cheating on their emissions). I think it is important to consider which place can get you published.

@EnvPolicyHopeful I want to clarify one thing. Just because you have 6 years of work experience, it doesn't mean that people in your future job (depending on what it is) will respect it. I think someone who actually does Environmental policy can comment better than I can on what prior work experience matters and what works less. However, as a career switcher (I am assuming), with the exception of research and academia, most policy jobs really like proof of professional experience based consultingesque projects (in their specific policy area) as signs that you are viable. My point is this... if you want to go into an applied job (non-research/non-academia) after graduate school, it benefits you to go to a more "professional" oriented program. If you want to go into research/academia, then that is a different story. I actually found this out the hard way. I went into grad school with 8 years work experience (project management, legal stuff, technology design, executive level strategy development) and none of that mattered because I was shooting for education policy. As someone who wasn't a former teacher/education programming/or community developer, I was told that at best I would get a job equivalent to someone with a year or two experience (if I were to stay in the field). I actually ended up doing an internship whereby, I was the oldest person by 8 years because no amount of degrees or work experience mattered to the area of the field I was involved in. I'm pretty sure education policy is probably more on the extreme side. However... that is something to note.

@prokem... I think the piece that you are missing is that you haven't been interacting with Ford MPP students. From what I understand they are relatively diverse and experienced as well. I think have a tight student community is important... but if there is no pathway to learn what you want to learn, then you aren't getting what really matters for going to grad school --> your desired career outcomes.

I think there are many different ways to think about this. 1. If you want to end up in California (or West Coast period), and are more than okay giving up a strong brand equity for the rest of the America, UCSD GPS MPP is hands down the right answer. With MPP, there is a lot of regional pull of a school, and UCSD is a well respected program and brand that will get you there. Also... who says you need to work in a lab in a program? San Diego has lots of opportunity within the wider University + local area. 2. I am really confused why you are even thinking about Michigan MS SEAS/Ford MPP Joint degree if your goal is to do more research based work. MS SEAS/FORD MPP are both rather more professional programs. I mean they both do have research opportunities, but the career outcomes lean more towards applied professions than research. Also, if you want to end up in California, this may not be the best option. This goes back to the regional pull factor. I WILL HOWEVER SAY... regional pull of a brand can be negated if there is a well placed alumni or if you experience a project with a regional bent of your liking. 3. Humphrey School MS-STEP. I actually really admire the Humphrey School and have met only great people from there. However, it does have a brand equity problem across the country (especially if you are trying to end up in California). If you are gambling that you will advance in your career by the prestige of your work and want to ride that boat, then go with it.

@tacos95 1. GMU is a pretty big program, so you can avoid the type casting. HOWEVER... what really concerns me is the simple lack of brand equity for GMU (even in the DC area) + weak community + mixed academic quality. One of my family friends actually purposely chose an MA program at George Mason so she wouldn't be burdened with making friends and live her own DC life. 2. If you don't go to SAIS, I think you would be super annoyed with the opportunities you'll be missing out. Especially as someone straight from undergrad, you really want to have the max brand equity + optimal semester side project / work experiences (easier to do center of DC vs. Arlington/Fairfax). I would recommend that you should try negotiating to increase your scholarship with SAIS.

@Karam2022 I recommend you consider these things: 1. The tight knit network and community of Yale Jackson vs. the brand + alumni + connections + network and opportunity with SIPA. 2. Yale Jackson - granted has the brand name of Yale, the Jackson institute is brand new so you won't have an alumni support based (or at least a small one from legacy programs). It is never good to be part of a "new program" in higher education because they are still figuring themselves out. That is especially true when big change influences (like corona) hits higher education hard across the board. With you an international student, it is especially concerning to go to a program that doesn't have a historical international student cohort. Also, broadly speaking, a professional masters degree is generally speaking viewed better than an MA (which is viewed is rather academic). 3. You are absolutely right with the SIPA and how New York City life hits them hard and the community isn't that strong. HOWEVER... SIPA has all connections and alumni base to support you to work internationally or work in development. From a pure career opportunity perspective, SIPA wins without a doubt. Also, the program is much bigger than than Yale Jackson, so there are lots of different people you can build social networks with. 4. Columbia has just as many professional programs (if not more) as Yale that you can collaborate with. Columbia Business School is pretty much = Yale School of Management. If I were you, I would take the risk of the weaker community and go to SIPA for the tremendously better career prospects and the benefits of a well established program.

Go to Fletcher - easy choice. Much better education experience, community environment, and brand. I would try to play hard ball and leverage one scholarship over the other .

So think of this in two ways. 1. would be other IR programs... I think MSFS takes the cake because you have the benefit of being a school with lots of other disciplines you can collaborate with + options for work experience. If you want to go the quant route, SAIS, is arguably a better option. 2. would be other MPP programs, with breadth of career options in mind, I would say HKS, Harris, or SIPA. If you want to do West Coast, both Price and Goldman are great options. Ford, CMU, and Duke are all good options for more domestic policy oriented stuff.

Just something to think about as someone who witnessed a lot of my friends who graduated from Fletcher 2 yearsish out from a recession (2011/2012). Bottom line, getting a job from Fletcher will probably be a lot more challenging coming out of this recession period... You might want to think about a school that gives you more academic and brand exposure options in the interest of career flexibility (granted Fletcher is awesome in its current space). 1. Last time, a lot of people managed to handle the recession by plowing into government jobs of sorts and shapes (Obama administration still kept the Federal government well staffed). Some people resorted random admin jobs at military bases. Others managed to Presidential Merit Fellow (PMFs) and back then it was super competitive. This worked for a lot of people. The problem now is that President Trump has taken out a lot of government non-defense funding and even the military is in an aggressive cost cutting mode (for example, the Marine Corps is going to be shrinking), so this option will no longer be as strong. The PMF program is still viable and still a good program, but it has lost a lot of its luster as it simply isn't as competitive anymore. 2. There may still be opportunities within the private sector with IR/security related matters, but given how the stock market has been battered, that may be difficult too as companies seek to cut costs. Regardless, Fletcher isn't exactly the prime place to set up for such work. Granted it might have some special connections with certain organizations, the Fletcher brand doesn't go that far outside of IR. Also, by virtue of location and logistics, its rather difficult for Fletcher folks to have experential learning with innovation oriented private sector activities compared to other urban policy/IR schools. 3. Since Fletcher does have a really tight knit community, I found it interesting that everyone was collectively freaking out together... but what wasn't happening was a can do attitude (this is what I saw... I'm sure someone else has a different opinion... but FYI). I think this is a function of Fletcher just being more isolated in its own space and grooms is a rather in group culture. I mean the pro is that you have a fiercely loyal alum base. The con is that the floating of new ideas and creative solutions to win against an economy wasn't that much the talk of the town.

I think it is important to consider what you want to do. If you want to be in Europe and work for non-profits / IGOs, MIA still make more sense. If you want to work in the US, then it is a no brainer to go to Fletcher. For brand, I want to highlight that Fletcher is only quite the name in the IR/IDEV space. Outside of that space, a lot of people don't know much about it.

I am not saying that Chinese students will all of sudden disappear. I'm just highlighting that the already well established trend of slowly diminished Chinese international student interest in US grad programs will sharpen. Chinese international students have been a reliable revenue source in the past 7 years or so for many programs, and even a partial displacement of that student population will have financial impacts on many US programs (some much more than others). The grad program I went to, Georgetown McCourt was interestingly 40% or so Chinese international students for my start class. I know they have diversified the international student population since then, but it is population that could determine a lot about the grad school experience.

So one thing to think about is how COVID-19 will probably scare away a lot of the Chinese international students (make that international students period). Their full tuition (or close to full tuition) payments subsidize a lot of funding for American students. My bet is that funding will decrease. Another thing to think about is how if you defer to next year, funding may decrease by virtue of competition - as in a lot more people will be trying to ride out the recession by going to grad school, and you'll have to compete with them for funding.

Sooo... assuming that funding and time is not an issue... 1. I would pick U. Chicago dual degree for you. You have the broadest range of empowerment among public sector, private sector, and academia. I say this because i don't think you know what you want to right now with graduate school. With time to try different things and the diverse range of career outcomes at Harris + CIR opportunities to do IR glory (I'm not sure if it has a language requirement), I think it would be helpful to you. 2. SAIS is a great program and it really helps with DC oriented jobs. Also keep in mind, it is more than just econ that will stomp your balls. It is the language requirement as well. I will say at SAIS, you have the opportunity to uniquely do live projects + career empowering part time work with organization in DC. 3. Of all the grad programs I visited, Fletcher was last for me... by a country mile. I spent 4 days at Fletcher shadowing one of my friends. I went to class with her, met her friends (including their parties), and explored the facilities. First of all... I acknowledge that Fletcher has amazing academics, awesome professors, and a terrific reputation within the IR community. However, my problems with Fletcher based upon my visit and discussing it with my friends are: 1. Low brand equity outside of the traditional IR community. My friends from Fletcher constantly have to explain their graduate education to pretty much everyone outside of the IR community, including to people in the DC or Boston area. The reason why this matters because as we are going into a recession, it is helpful to have a brand that gives you a boost to flexibly hunt for a wider range of job, beyond just a narrow band of focus. 2. Echo Chamber... In the two classes I went to, I saw a one to two people vs. everyone else in the class situation. Granted I may have agreed more with the majority, it was uncomfortable in this echo-chamber Jurassic park 3. Academic isolation... The reality is that Tufts doesn't have an MBA school, Law School, Policy school, and its Medical and Public health schools are in downtown Boston. I personally like to approach things in a multi-disciplinary collaborative manner, and it is simply a bit difficult to do that at Fletcher. Yes, there is a consortium relationship with Harvard and MIT, but going there is logistically painful, at a minimum 45 min each way (can be 1 hour, 30 min depending on where you live and which school). Also, granted there is a great degree of Harvard access afforded to Fletcher students, there are still trips, programming, and credentials that are closed off to Fletcher students. Basically, you are still a Fletcher student, not someone with all the real access of Harvard's resources. 4. Passive aggressive environment... Never have I encountered such a one upping passive aggressive social situation as Fletcher. Yes, superficially everyone is super chill and friendly. However, after socializing with my host's friends and partying with them, I quickly realized there was a crazy amount of passive aggressive flexing going on. I would hear conversations such as, "oh I met a high ranking so and so today and told him/her how so and so thing done was f-ed up and I got kudos... go me!... how was your day?" or "my parents are taking me to this awesome vacation... where will you go?". Also as an aside, Fletcher is historically better known for producing people for non-profit sector - granted their grads do go everywhere.

Sooo... there is no simple way to look at this. 1. It totally depends on your job. Key areas are: A: Working for a tech company B: Working for government C : Working for a non-tech company trying to tech up D : Working for research organization. 2. Varies greatly... A: Anywhere from 50K to 120K (the 120K being Americans who go into tech lobbying) 3. NO, at least not directly. Never seen of it nor have I heard of it. 4. Unless it is a technical program (like a data analytics program) - NO For you, your best career option (in terms of income is likely one of these two options). A: Working in tech policy for a major American company but focused on your home country (for example Google Policy --> Whatever country you are in). B: Work for a company from your home country trying to expand business in America. In terms of school, there are three ways to look it. 1. You can try to be as close to big tech Industry as possible - Berkeley's MPP - Goldman school would be a great option 2. You can try to be as close to defense industry as possible (not a good option as an international student) and do Georgetown Security Studies or MSFS 3. You can try to go to a AI/Tech innovation hub like Boston and try for HKS or even Boston University

@Anonymous_2019 , first of all... I want to establish, I am in no way a die hard promoter of Georgetown McCourt or Georgetown University as is. I respect the institution for its pros and cons, and for it being a place of higher education. I also respect Fletcher and Tufts as a place of higher education that produces excellent leaders. Members of my family have worked for Admiral James G. Stavridis (former Dean of Fletcher) and some of my best friends from college have gone to Fletcher (both MALD and PhD). In no ways am I trying to disparage Fletcher. I just want to help people considering a major life decision to look at all the angles. Now as to our conversation about brand recognition. The data you pointed out I believe is undergrad acceptance at Tufts undergrad vs. Georgetown undergrad for Class of 2024. First off, that is false analogy to associate brand equity with undergrad acceptance rates. I can conversely highlight undergrad US News rankings (Georgetown outstrips Tufts) to brand equity, but again that would be comparing apples and oranges. I mean hypothetically, the right way to do it by data is to do a Net Promoter Score survey or Likert scale survey across the country of each brand against each other. Barring accessibility of meaningful data, I think anecdotes can reflect a lot. My anecdote about the Fletcher brand is this. I had a best friend who was a Fletcher alum (this is before I went to Georgetown). Everywhere we went on our travels together (after her graduation) - her hometown in the Mid-West, seeing friends in the South, and even Washington DC policy (but not IR) circles, she had to explain over and over again of what Fletcher is. Some people may have had inkling of Tufts (like "I think it is a school somewhere"), but she always had to explain Tufts as well. When I was looking at grad schools, she even mentioned how often (living in DC and at her job which is kind of IR related but not really) she had to explain to people about her education background and the Fletcher brand on a regularly basis. The reason why I mention brand equity is this. 1. If someone in the traditional IR space doesn't know Fletcher, I would be concerned about working for that person / organization. 2. As I previously mentioned, in this brave new world we live + post recession world, I think it is smart to consider having career flexibility and broader brand appeal, especially as non-traditional IR jobs become more common (and I applaud how Fletcher has made significant inroads to non-traditional IR organizations and positions). 3. A big incentive for grad school is an investment into the brand and how much potential gain (career, social, or otherwise) that brand affords. I think it is important for people to hear the strengths and limitation of every brand they are considering. ALSO... as a matter of being in the graduate circles / graduate recruiting circles... how Fletcher is a "school of law and diplomacy" as non-JD or LLM granting institution, I will say has been a point of confusion at networking events (that I have seen over and over again). In the grand scheme of things, these are small chips that don' t really matter, but I think people should know to highlight what people face outside of the Fletcher/IR world as a Fletcher student / alum.

I don't know your situation, but some things to think about. 1. Do you want a DC job or not? If the answer is yes... go to Georgetown if you can or want to pay for it. 2. You might want to figure out which program has the professors that actually teach you find more aligned with your interests 3. You might want to figure out which program has the career outcomes that are more aligned with your interests. 4. Keep in mind that Stanford MIP is a super small program (like 20 to 30 a year). That means the alumni base is small. Each cohort at MSFS will be gigantic by comparison. That means a much bigger alumni base.

It can go both ways. 1. With an MSFS, you have to keep in mind the IR grad school community isn't exactly big to begin with. That being said, you have greater flexibility to pivot your career in something within IR that you know you have better job security (trade/patents, global health, and etc.). Obviously if you try to do IDEV, you probably will be struggling more because not as much IDEV opportunities going on when funding isn't there. 2. With an area studies, if you are in a hot area that all of sudden becomes popular, you do have job security. I randomly know some guy who is the expert on all things Georgia (the country), and he has job security because very few other people know about it. But... go outside your super skinny swim lane and then good luck.

@Bubba94 So by Georgetown, I am assuming you mean MSFS. So I want to highlight that one real advantage about MSFS that I don't think people fully appreciate is the opportunity to do projects / part-time during the semester (granted it takes some life management) to pad your resume + maybe make some side income by virtue of being in DC. It is so much easier to go into a career field (especially if it is a drastic pivot), if you have a track record of research / internship or fellowship experience during grad school that you can speak to + put on your resume. My friends who went to Fletcher may have at most done research for a professor, a small non-profit, or some random things locally in Boston. At MSFS, my friends did IR work at Capital Hill, brought Amazon to Arlington, and etc. on top of their summer internships. Honestly the most important thing about such experiences is knowing what you like and don't like. Have this direct access will likely be more important as we about to approach recession. I remember during 2012, when my friends from Fletcher were taking random admin jobs at military bases because there was that much around. I would say having resume padding opportunities goes a long way. ALSO... if you go beyond the traditional IR school jobs (and that increasingly is the thing to do), the Fletcher brand doesn't mean anything. A lot of people outside of the Northeast don't even know what Tufts is.

So I want to clarify about my second point. I acknowledge that there isn't a hard barrier that a Fletcher students do have "access" to Harvard events and there are joint activities going on there. HOWEVER... I just wanted to dispel any notion that Fletcher students get access to the Harvard network both in school and out of school. For example, Fletcher Students have the Fletcher run DC Career Trip and NYC Career trip, which are both super awesome. However, Fletcher student's can't just hop onto the the HKS Career Services (at least back when I knew Fletcher) activities or some of the trips some of the trips certain Harvard grad programs plan (i.e. the Annual Israel Trip). That on top of the logistics of going to Harvard means you realistically acquire partial benefits (mostly in class + some joint activities). Bottom line, I recommend perspective students to think of the Harvard - MIT consortium matter as a bonus, but not a center-piece for choosing Fletcher.

@KyleR , I think it is important to understand why these things exist and the context behind them. 1. Yes, MBB (mostly McKinsey and BCG) do indeed hire people from HKS single degree only students. One of my instructors in grad school was one of them. I know people that went through the MBB recruiting process (I even know some of the people referred to on the employment snapshot). I am not denying that MBB hires at HKS whatsoever. Every year these firms do get a reliable cohort of people from HKS single degree to go to theses firms. Yes, some of them do go far. MBB comes back because they know they get a reliable number that takes offers. It is reliable but from what I understand the # of people is in the single digits for single degree HKS folks, with the vast majority of those starting at the funnel not making it to the end of funnel (getting an offer). 2. The jobs report however does not fully detail the process in which to get one of these full time offers and the funnel for it (which is pretty daunting) given the extent of interest. A: You have to network into these MBB opportunities. This means someone from the consulting firm has to notice you, like you, and identify to the recruiter to put you on the short list. Yes, there are some on campus recruiting opportunities to do so. You can also get someone you know in the firm to write a letter of referral (I was armed with 2 of these to get my interview at BCG). It is more than just being liked. This is when having a compelling story matters. A compelling story is two parts. One is identifying sufficient academic background + work background to do good enough at a job + justifying a real interest in consulting. You don't have all those pieces together, you are done. Remember, you are also competing against people from other programs (including the MBAs). B: You have to spend a a good few months (that is recommended, granted there are ninjas who only prepared for two weeks or so) to prepare for case interviews. MPP people come at a disadvantage because lot of these are business concepts that non-business people don't necessarily have familiarity with. You need to be prepared to identify a business case for utilizing break even, ROI, profit margin, and etc. - both the math for it and justifying why you are taking a certain approach over another + tell a story behind the case. It sounds easy, but getting it to offer level takes that time and practice. Also, you need to masters how to manage behavioral interviews. C : You have to make first round interview. Usually the first round is with someone who has been at an MBB 3 to 8 year after graduate school. It is usually two cases with two separate people. They do start and end with some behavioral questions. D : If you get selected for final interview, it is an interview with a partner. Half of this is behavioral, the other part is case. This is where they ask key questions about weaknesses on the application. For example, I know someone who had a a low GPA (like sub-3.0), but got into grad school via strong GMAT + work experience. The partner asked him to explain himself. I know people who failed to explain their weaknesses or didn't do so well with the behavioral get booted despite a case interview performance. E: At the end of each interview, they usually give points (or some form of points), and then they rank stack all the interviewees against the openings that are available. Now... I can't 100% say for sure if this applies to HKS, but in some places there openings numbers are for the entire pool of candidates. For example, as an HKS single degree person, getting an offer means having an post interview ranking among the number of openings available with other graduate degree / MBA/ dual degrees/etc. among all those interviewing. When I interviewed at BCG, there were people that were Engineering Masters and MBAs competing against me. So you are right, at the interview, it is all about how well you perform. However, you are competing across the board (at least in some of the firms). Bottom line, it is very possible to get an MBB role from HKS, but it is hard. It is even hard coming from HBS. I did the journey myself and it is one of those things that are way easier said than done.

@Coffeetea The point I'm trying to make is the value of having career flexibility. Everyone goes into graduate school with a concept of what they want to do with it. However, most people I have seen at all the different programs make modifications (some big, some small) to what they originally wanted to go to school for and what they end up doing. What I'm trying to highlight is that the breadth of opportunity exposure is bigger at HKS period. Yes, I know people that went into grad school wanting to do international relations and came out wanting to do domestic and vice versa. Although, most often it is people who want to do international relations and change their area/topic of focus (or their domestic counterpart). I say this because I have met people that went to SAIS and by year 2 they are over their passion for international relations and are looking for opportunities outside of traditional international relations roles. My entire point is just to make sure the risks of going to a very focused program (SAIS) vs. a program with a broader career options (HKS) with consideration of your propensity for change (or lack there of). At the end of the day, no one can read the future, but I think it is important for people to know these trends. ALSO... by running office, I mean office from local to federal (at all the different constituent sizes). My HKS friend actually ran for Congressional office one year after graduation. HKS has produced social media / press releases of their recent graduates who run for all office. Yes, I know people from other MPP programs who ran for office a few years out, but arguably, HKS has a disproportionate number of people who do so, and I find that interesting and awesome.

@Coffeetea I think one way the HKS network is different than the SAIS is how you kind of (part of it is that you have to seek and out... and part of it does come to you) acquire the Harvard network. SAIS is a stand alone school in JHU in DC. They don't really play that often with the rest of JHU (more like I have never heard of it). HKS on the other hand, plays regularly with all the other players at Harvard. So for example... if you end up doing something Health related, you can easily play ball with people from the Chan school (public health). If you do something a bit more business side, you can take classes + have opportunities to do stuff at HBS. What all this means is a more diverse array of projects and a more multi-disciplinary opportunity (if you want it that is). How does this manifest in career outcomes? You have people end up doing lots of non-traditional post grad school jobs: 1. Fringe policy jobs. I met an HKS grad who worked on LinkedIn's US labor support projects. 2. I meet HKS people involved in start ups (rarely see that for non-HKS MPP/MPA people) 3. Disproportionate number of people who run for office I could probably go on... I think this is important to weigh in in having career flexibility as we are going into a recession. Although... it also doesn't make sense to go to HKS if you are going into mountains of debt.