went_away

Public policy programs will do little to no good for getting one into a top-tier consulting firm - that nearly always requires a top-tier MBA and involves extremely fierce competition. For second/third-tier and more niche public sector and defense oriented firms (which pay considerably less than MBB) SAIS and MSFS seem to be fairly strong in the DC area.

As you should. No way the salary from a career in government or a nonprofit justifies paying full sticker price for two years at a private graduate school - all while forgoing income. Tuition and expected earnings are WAY out of whack at top schools of International Affairs and Public Policy.

Not enough information to make an informed assessment, but I'd say your chances are moderately decent to poor for HKS. Your master's will definitely not make up for a low undergrad GPA and could even be seen as a negative. Additional details that matter: your rank in the military, leadership/accomplishments in your military career (ie seeing combat, special forces, security clearance level), caliber/pedigree of undergrad and graduate institutions, previous areas of study, additional work and leadership experience outside of the military, clarity of post-degree goals. One thing that all schools like about military applicants is they usually have $$ due to the GI bill or other sponsored opportunities.

I agree with the above two posters that your chances are probably better than you realize. You should definitely apply to several additional programs to see if one of them will give you a nice scholarship (Fletcher, SAIS, MSFS); the top-ranked IR programs aren't all that different from each other and the concentration isn't that big of a deal once you graduate. Maybe also consider NYU if New York is important to you. Definitely address your first undergrad weakness, but do it simply and succinctly. Also, and related to this, watch your tone in your essays to project an articulate, purposeful thrust and to not come across as whiny, overly stressed/negative, or boastful.

There are lots of great 1-year programs out there for mid-career professionals such as yourself. Problem is, they're not designed for career changers, but for those looking to further establish themselves in their existing field. You sound like a go-getter and intelligent though, so with proper expectation management I'm guessing you could be quite successful in leveraging such a program to get into a new field. Next steps - look at all the top-ranked programs, do your research, and make a decision. If the international focus is interesting to you, don't neglect the top international affairs schools, such as SAIS and Fletcher - both have very good 1-year programs for established professionals, at least a few of whom are looking to make a change.

I studied at both schools, so can provide a bit of insight. Medford/Somerville are suburbs of Boston and just a few stops up the metro line from the city. Boston cost of living is very slightly less than DC. Medford is very boring, but picturesque with a few nice bars/restaurants. If you're an IR nerd, though you should be having tons of fun on campus because of all the amazing events, learning opportunities, and speakers they bring to town. In any event, it's super easy to get into the city (or Harvard square, which is only like one stop away) for drinking and salsa dancing (a personal favorite - try Havana Club, far and away best salsa club I've found in the US). Fletcher community is definitely as good as they say; the school is very well organized and nothing like a social science program at a midwest state university - which is partially why it's so EXPENSIVE. One issue is there's a tiny bit of a high school feel with the full-time 2-year MA students, but that's not necessarily a bad cause everybody seems to really bond and stick together for years after. Quality of the student body at Fletcher will be much higher than the Bush School, so your courses will be MUCH more challenging. The Bush School is actually a fantastic program - in some ways better than Fletcher for career outcomes because of its political connections, plus it's super cheap for regular students - and you'll learn a ton there, but Fletcher is definitely more of a small fish/big pond situation. Plus the northeast is simply where it's at in terms of international affairs - the Boston (thanks to financial services industry and MIT/Harvard)/NYC, and DC area is really the country - and world's - triangle of power. I went to Fletcher because I viewed it as a lifelong investment in learning and relationships. It's ridiculously expensive relative to typical starting salaries (though I got a pretty decent scholarship, which made a big difference), but I don't regret it at all.

I don't understand what you wrote, if you wanted to attack me or what exactly. Regardless, below are a couple of sources that have informed my thinking on the relationship of one's undergraduate institution to career prospects. Both strongly support my own take on the relative influence of the eliteness of the undergraduate institution vs. graduate school on future earnings. Also, keep in mind that I am not speaking here as a future student or interested observant. I am a graduate of one of the higher ranked grad schools of international affairs and currently work in the industry in Washington DC, so I do have quite a lot of personal knowledge on the topic. I certainly do not agree that the only advantage that graduates of top undergraduate universities have is due to personal connections formed through friendships on-campus. The research I've been able to find strongly supports my assertion: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2473238 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/why-you-cant-catch-up.html?_r=1

LinkedIn is your first friend. So many search options are available, even with a free account. Try to find current students or recent graduates working in organizations that match up with your career goals and hit them up for an informational interview (I'm sure you can google for etiquette on that if you're unsure how to go about it). Fletcher prides itself on being a school with some of the friendlier/more helpful students and alumni, so I'm guessing you'll hear back. Also, definitely start talking to the admissions department at Fletcher and see if they can put you in touch with a current student or three - their insights should be helpful to you, and showing solid evidence of enthusiasm/knowledge of the school and your career goals certainly won't hurt. I took a look at your profile and it looks like you don't have an X factor driving you in (ie worked in the West Bank for a year) and lack strong work and international experience. Given that, your campus leadership and high grades (which is also a form of campus leadership) are your strongest suit, so you should play that up in your application presentation.

GPA is a bit problematic, but you'll get credit for solid majors. For most schools, work experience trumps all else. They want successful graduates who will be employed by or shortly after graduation, not disgruntled burn-outs. If you are currently employed at the 'well known government consultancy' (ie it's a real, permanent job) and your function is even vaguely related to your desired career goals, I'm gonna guess you'll have a better than even shot at Fletcher/SIPA types (I don't know anything about Goldman). If your work experience is more on the internship level (unless we're talking truly name-brands eg CFR) absent stellar test scores/GPA, you may need to get a little more work experience under your belt.

In and of itself, I'd say it's mildly important. What's much more likely to influence your chances is your perceived professional trajectory, which is likely strongly influenced by the quality of your undergraduate institution. Go to a highly ranked, private school (Johns Hopkins/Tufts/Georgetown/Carnegie Mellon/Claremont Mckenna) and you'll probably have several prestigious internships and a good runway for decent full-time employment at a relevant employer (the sophisticated guidance and doors opened by those top schools - not to mention you tend to actually learn quite a lot more - is incredibly helpful and results in significantly higher lifetime earnings). Go to lesser-ranked and/or public university and more likely you find yourself working customer service/retail type positions or for peanuts at no-name NGO. I am an example of the latter and was still able to make things work, but it's been incredibly difficult and I'm 2-4 years behind those who had those wonderful opportunities in their teens and early 20s. If you're from a less advantaged background, it's obviously helpful if you can build up the margins of your application (languages, additional quant courses, volunteer work, community service, leadership). I'd highly recommend you try to get some current students or (better yet) graduates of your target schools to look over your resume and application materials and make constructive comments. One final comment - if you have a less prestigious background and lack those elite connections and work experiences that others have acquired through attending a top undergraduate institution, I highly recommend you go to the most prestigious grad school possible, barring catastrophic debt levels. When I was applying, I ruled out the very top schools - I reasoned my blue collar background would not be well-received by admission committees - but did not even consider schools below the levels of SAIS/Fletcher/SIPA/Georgetown, knowing I would need that more elite sheen on the resume. If you want to work in the US, I would also caution you to think carefully about going to school in Europe. European universities have a reputation for placing far less emphasis on career/industry connections than the top American professional programs.

Fair points. I'm not keen to get into a close reading exercise either. Also, having read the additional entries from the OP I would increasingly lean toward your assessment of his chances at the top schools (though he doesn't seem particularly interested in the top-tier programs; anyway it's a good discussion for others) while continuing to agree that he should set his sights higher.

Ben, You write - 'You explicitly stated he can make it into any IR program he wants.' I said nothing of the sort, as my quote below clearly shows. I said good execution (ie good test scores and essays) along with what we know about him should make him COMPETITIVE for any top program, not that he could make it into or get into any program. Please read my words more carefully. Here they are again. In addition, I also explicitly stated that only those with high test scores and great professional experience make it into Princeton/Harvard/Yale. Read my quote again, noticing that: Finally, I specifically guided him toward SAIS/SIPA/Fletcher/MSFS as the programs he should be targeting, and as well at Texas and Pittsburgh as less competitive programs that are still good for career outcomes. Again, I did not say that he or anyone 'can make it into any IR program he wants' (your quote, not mine). One last point - I'm not necessarily surprised that the example you gave failed to gain admissions to Kennedy (lowish GPA and no compelling leadership experience from that bit of info), however that individual was certainly competitive for any top program, but certainly not guaranteed anything.

Ben, where did I undersell necessary work experience for MPA applicants? I said that the OP was underselling himself and that gaining admission to public service grad programs is much easier than he had made it out to be. I have no clue where you're getting your data on MPA programs having more competitive admissions than IR programs. And as I clearly stated - Princeton and HKS are among the most competitive programs in this space and only the more ambitious/successful applicants gain admission. I do agree with your point on $$ and debt - a point I constantly make on here is that grads of elite public service oriented programs make very little money commensurate with the cost of the education. A couple of nit-picks here. First - I fully agree with the remarks on language, and hadn't even considered the China investment in East Africa angle. Regarding DoS and name-brand schools - I think this is one of those urban myths out there that State hires based on performance/test scores and that pedigree doesn't matter. Couldn't be more mistaken! In fact, DoS is likely one of the government agencies most highly attuned to pedigree. Take a look at feeder schools on the State Department LinkedIn page or look at pages of specific schools to see where grads go. Apart from a few local schools (the George Masons and UMD types and GWU to some extent), you'll see an extreme preponderance of schools from the top echelons of foreign affairs, places like Georgetown, Fletcher, SAIS, Harvard Kennedy, SIPA, and Princeton. This myth comes about because the Foreign Service selection process supposedly considers all candidates equally without regard to background. However the FS makes up only a tiny portion of the Department. In addition, as of a couple years ago, Georgetown SFS alone sent more candidates to the FS than the next three schools combined; also, the Department's fellowship and diversity programs that send hires directly to the FS recruit nearly exclusively from top-tier foreign affairs grad schools. Finally, the selection process for the FS has changed in the last several years, and the Department no longer exclusively judges candidates based on oral/written test scores, but also assess them holistically, looking at past professional and educational experiences. I do agree that MPA programs are usually very different from IR programs, but that still depends on the program in question. For example, as I pointed out above, Columbia SIPA's MPA and MIA programs are identical with the exception of one course and the differentiation is there exclusively so students can brand themselves professionally in the way they would like. I don't know anything about University of York. Webster has a reputation as a school for government/military professionals who just need to check the master's degree box and are in no way looking to use the degree to obtain a job. I would strongly recommend you not go to either of those schools (ditto for any online degree) with the expectation it will help you gain a position at an elite NGO. In terms of rankings, I think I was quite clear in my earlier post and included a link to the world's most comprehensive IR schools rankings system. LSE, SOAS, IHEID, and Sciences Po are all top-tier institutions in Europe and that have both strengths and weaknesses that have been extensively discussed elsewhere on this board. To be brutally honest, it sounds like you really need to buckle down and 'do your homework' in terms of really researching the programs that are interesting to you and determining if they contain the content and pull to enable you to achieve your professional goals.

You're aiming too low. It's not that hard to get into a good International Relations program, and if you show a little more self-esteem (haha) in your application, plus good execution - that along with your Mandarin/French skills (fantastic language combination) should make you a competitive candidate for admissions to any top IR program. Name-brand NGOs are very prestigious gigs and tend to take their interns from the name-brand schools, so keep that in mind. You're probably right that an MPA will lend you more marketable skills than International Relations/Affairs degree, but I would counsel you to simply do the program that is most interesting to you. The good IR programs will set you up to be competitive for interesting internships that should, fingers crossed, lead to full-time employment in the field. While I disagree with the methodology of this ranking, it's pretty much spot on in terms of the master's programs you should be looking at. Check it out - http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/02/03/top-twenty-five-schools-international-relations/. Every school on the list is high quality. The top schools you should probably focus on are SIPA (by the way, the MPA and IR programs there are nearly identical), SAIS, Fletcher, and Georgetown MSFS. Fletcher is extremely strong in the NGO world and probably a good fit for you. If you have high test scores and ambition, look at Kennedy, Princeton Woodrow Wilson, and Yale Jackson. NYU is also good, if expensive and a little less prestigious, and Texas A&M and Pittsburgh are great below-the-radar schools for career outcomes, and may be very cost-effective schools as well - a factor that - very appropriately - seems to be important to you.

You sound competitive for HKS level, but - barring working for a gold-plated name brand employer - you're gonna have to up your game in the application and demonstrate how beyond doing laudable and interesting work in your field, you're doing work with impact beyond you're immediate environment, taking leadership, and clearly setting yourself up for great success in the future, and also generally demonstrating a healthy trajectory in the narrative of your work experience. I think you're taking the correct approach by viewing the value of the degree somewhat intrinsically, particularly as you've noticed those who are have risen to the top of your desired field generally do not have the MPA/MPP (this is true in many fields, come to think of it; amassing power is what counts most ultimately). Most, but not all, of my knowledge of public policy programs bleeds over from my research into those that are also well known in the International Affairs world (maybe why I see so many things through the lens of power struggles). I know Wagner and Goldman come up quite a lot in these discussions, but wouldn't be able to give advice on those particular programs. What I can tell you is to look first for brand name and school power (there it is again), and next at the specialty strengths of the program. Rankings are generally the best method for assessing school strength, but you also have to judge the rankings. Poets and Quants is a great site (albeit for MBAs) to start thinking critically about the methodological aspect of rankings and what you should and should not pay attention to. One last thought - I would caution you to think clearly about doing an executive format program as a career change strategy. Even the best of these programs are designed to aid established professionals in consolidating themselves in pre-existing careers and really aren't set up to help anyone make a big change. Probably better to save the non-residential EMPA type programs till after you've already made your desired change. I actually did that type of program format as a career changer in my own field and it's worked out for me, but it's been incredibly difficult and I know absolutely no one else from my top-tier program that has successfully made a whole-sale career change out of it.

I agree; stats alone definitely aren't gonna cut it for HKS.

Ben414, From a quick look at the admissions rates it looks like it's about twice as difficult to gain admissions to H/Y/S Law School (aprox. 10%) as it is to HKS (aprox. 20%). Those stellar stats you cite are in the 99th percentile range (174+ LSAT certainly is), so certainly not indicative that the 'numbers game' makes admissions any easier. I get your point that HKS *may* have a more holistic admissions process and good work experience there is likely more important than for law school. But if anything I would see that as an argument for the relative easiness of getting into a top public policy program vs. law school as there are considerably more ways to obtain interesting work experience than there are to get a top LSAT score. My analysis is also colored by my interactions with numerous extremely stressed out law school applicants and grads vs. the relatively relaxed applicants to HKS and other top public policy programs who indicate that they enjoy a much more enjoyable work/life balance. One final point - median starting salaries from public policy programs certainly diverge quite a lot, but $80,000-$100,000 would be at the very top of the scale. Compare this to median starting salary of (albeit heavily indebted) top law grads that are in the $100,000-$150,000 range, indicating that - numbers aside - the quality of the incoming student body is quite high, thus upping the competition. Of course, these are very different different student bodies and not really comparable, but I strongly stand by my assertion that gaining admissions to an HKS master's program is dramatically easier than a top law school.

Most are (diplomat/UN types and working on the hill) and there's also quite a lot of folks who go into private sector consulting (albeit primarily government services) coming out of public policy programs. Admissions to Ivy law degrees is considerably more competitive than public policy master's degrees (even the Kennedy School is dramatically easier to get into than top law programs), so I think you should be totally fine. The sad truth is public policy and international affairs master's degrees just don't have anywhere near the heft and impact on one's career that top MBA and law degrees do; admissions is commensurately less intense. So, the programs should like your profile and experience for admissions purposes - for all but the most competitive programs you'll likely be considered a catch. Do keep in mind you're (most likely) migrating to a lower paid field and may need to take a considerable cut in income. Hopefully you don't have massive law school loans. With your legal career under your belt, you'll be viewed as a mid-career student, and grades/test scores should be less important. Quant - ya, might be smart to knock out intro to micro and macroeconomics if you haven't already; intro to statistics might also be smart to take if you're feeling ambitious (look at requirements/recommendations of the particular programs you're applying to). Finally, I'm not convinced that you would need an MPA/MPP to make this transition. You do sound ambitious though, so for max impact I'm not sure I'd recommend you look at any programs apart from Kennedy (if $$ is no object; it's expensive and they don't tend to offer any financial aid) or Woodrow Wilson (by far the best choice and have fantastic financial aid, but extremely competitive).

I've known folks who who have traversed that path. I'd recommend you go the Ivy League route to get that extra sheen on your resume - SIPA, Woodrow Wilson, or Kennedy.

Colocho, if government work is out for you, that precludes quite a lot of jobs, not to mention you'll find many of those nonprofit opportunities are actually funded by some government entity. I'd suggest you check out SIPA and/or Columbia Law; the New York orbit feels quite distinct from the all-gov-all-the-time frenzy of DC - though NYC is considerably (exponentially?) more frenetic than DC. Anyway, Columbia has quite a lot of interesting stuff going on in civil society - not to mention their natural UN focus - that I sense might be up your alley.

Concentrations matter little - interesting classes and content matter? Yes. Significant impact on career prospects? Very unlikely. What truly matters is your previous professional experience, the relative level of prestigiousness of your institution of study, and luck/persistence in applying to jobs and internships (roughly in that order, at least at the outset). A JD is a recognized professional qualification (and even more insanely expensive than a top MA) and an MA in International Affairs really can't be compared to that or necessarily even compete at that level for at least the first several years. If you want to go into law, become a lawyer (actually don't, because going to law school is a terrible proposition these days). If you are a true savant/nerd/heir to multimillion dollar fortune, check out what's likely the top program in the world or, alternatively, this one. You'll find similar programs and classes in International Law and Organizations at Georgetown's MSFS degree, Fletcher MALD, Columbia SIPA, and GWU Elliot School - nothing particularly about those course offerings at SAIS. For the kind of granular information you're interested in at SAIS, I'd highly recommend you contact admissions and arrange a social and class visit. They were extremely helpful when I did this back in my admissions days.

The MBA is less about course offerings; it's a differentiator for employers that signals you are a successful person on an upward trajectory, capable of handling money, and worthy of leadership opportunities. MBA grads have vastly more and better career options than those graduating from business-area specialized master's degrees. Obtaining admission to a top MBA program is commensurately more difficult; American programs are also extremely difficult to get into for the 30+ crowd.

Apply to Fletcher, SAIS, Princeton Woodrow Wilson School, Georgetown MSFS, and HKS and go to the school that gives you the best funding. Personally, I think Fletcher is far and away your best fit, given your regional and functional interests. If you get full funding from your government, it's up to you. Unless you're determined to have the Manhattan experience (nothing wrong with that), I wouldn't particularly recommend SIPA. I quite enjoy Columbia University and have attended many classes and events there, but the SIPA program has always come across as something of a degree mill with very little personal touch for students. There are, however, many resources offered there and if you are aggressive enough to take advantage of them going there can be a positive experience.

In addition to HKS, you should also look at Syracuse, always a top ranked MPA program. As always, Princeton should be at the top of your list.

Ya, I'd look first at program quality and fit and secondarily at location. Where it is just isn't that big of a deal as you'll mostly be applying for summer internships online and completing them while out of class. For example, going to Harvard Kennedy in sleepy Cambridge - or even Princeton/Yale way out of the way - likely will do a lot more for your career than going to the Elliot School (still quality, but not at the same level) in hopping Foggy Bottom. Location matters more in terms of quality of life and where'd you like to live for general life reasons as opposed to professional opportunities. SAIS and Fletcher match up pretty well and Georgetown MSFS is probably a notch above both, but all students compete for and tend to get similar opportunities. Personally, I think Fletcher is loads of fun and an incredibly stimulating place, not to mention quite a nice, traditional campus and just up the road from Harvard.