Azrou

Right, I didn't mean to imply that you would be studying IR, but guessed from your profile you would be interested in a degree that you could apply in an international context. I applied to programs that will connect with the international development field. They go by a variety of names. Some of are MPP, some are MPAff, MPA, or Master of ID. As someone pointed out in another thread, the degree title does not matter so much, it really comes down to the courses you take and the focus of the faculty/school.

I would suggest you take a hard second look at SAIS. Maybe reach out and look any friends/friends of friends/etc who are alumni that you could talk to.

They are absolutely not worth the debt. Don't go to grad school if it'll give you more than a little debt. It's a scam.

Work on your references...obviously the sub-3.0 GPA put you in a bad spot, but I think it was the LORs that really sunk you.  GPA is really the only thing that is outside of your control at this point - work experience and volunteering, GRE scores, your SOP, and LORs can all be improved up until the minute you hit the submit button on an application.  You didn't speak to the strength of the references, but just having an academic advisor writing one indicates you didn't make a positive impression on many of your professors.  What's more, adcoms were probably raising an eyebrow at the fact that you have 3 years of work experience but did not get professional reference from one of your bosses.  I don't know the reasons behind that but if I were looking at your application I would probably think that you are still haven't combined a sense of purpose and motivation with the natural intelligence that got you through high school, into an Ivy League, and good test scores.  Here's what you need to do.
 
1. Rethink your choice of references.  Do you know if the prof wrote a good letter or did he seem reluctant at all?  Dredge through your transcript for classes where you got an A or A-, preferably upper-level courses in econ, political science, math, etc.  Reach out to those profs even if you know they won't remember you, tell them what you have been up to and your future plans and see if you they will write LORs.  Contact your previous supervisors as well.
 
2. Sit down and figure out what you actually want to do.  Is it working on environmental policy?  At-risk youth?  It's cool to say you want to work in "government, the nonprofit sector, or in elected office" but those are the type of broad goals that high school graduates have, not people with several years of work experience trying to get into a masters program.  I would guess that your SOP was quite vague and unfocused as a result.
 
3.  Once you figure out what to do, find local orgs involved in that field and start sending out emails.  Contact the HR departments of these orgs and think tanks and see if they'll take on an unpaid volunteer/intern.   Look up alums from your undergrad institution and set up informational interviews.  You're not going to get a paid position with no relevant experience and zero connections.  You have to be willing to work for free.
 
4. Enroll in a summer or night course, preferably in microeconomics or something similar.  Show up to every class, ace every test, and get to know the professor.  Then ask the professor to write you a LOR.
 
5. Retake the GRE.  Q and AW scores are decent but not great.  Q is critical and due to the quantitative aspect of many policy schools, adcoms will look at that first.  The importance of AW is debatable, but a better score can't hurt, and if you are as smart as you say you are then a 5.0 should be easily attainable.  You want to give adcoms as many reasons as possible to think "his undergrad was a bit spotty but maybe he's got the maturity now to cut it here."  A 4.0 AW is just another excuse to throw your application in the trash bin.
 
7. Scratch your SOP and write a brand new one.  If you've done everything above then you have a much better understanding of your goals and what you have done and are willing to do to accomplish them.
 
Rutgers won't blow people away, but it is a good school, and as mentioned above, state schools usually have a good reputation and network locally since that is where most grads end up working.  George Mason and UMD College Park also have solid programs in the DC area if that's what you are set on.  Finally, I think you can get into GWU and Wagner if you put the effort in, but just be aware that your GPA will probably mean that funding is out of the question no matter how good the rest of your application is...so be prepared to fork over sticker price if it comes to that.

Work on your references...obviously the sub-3.0 GPA put you in a bad spot, but I think it was the LORs that really sunk you.  GPA is really the only thing that is outside of your control at this point - work experience and volunteering, GRE scores, your SOP, and LORs can all be improved up until the minute you hit the submit button on an application.  You didn't speak to the strength of the references, but just having an academic advisor writing one indicates you didn't make a positive impression on many of your professors.  What's more, adcoms were probably raising an eyebrow at the fact that you have 3 years of work experience but did not get professional reference from one of your bosses.  I don't know the reasons behind that but if I were looking at your application I would probably think that you are still haven't combined a sense of purpose and motivation with the natural intelligence that got you through high school, into an Ivy League, and good test scores.  Here's what you need to do.
 
1. Rethink your choice of references.  Do you know if the prof wrote a good letter or did he seem reluctant at all?  Dredge through your transcript for classes where you got an A or A-, preferably upper-level courses in econ, political science, math, etc.  Reach out to those profs even if you know they won't remember you, tell them what you have been up to and your future plans and see if you they will write LORs.  Contact your previous supervisors as well.
 
2. Sit down and figure out what you actually want to do.  Is it working on environmental policy?  At-risk youth?  It's cool to say you want to work in "government, the nonprofit sector, or in elected office" but those are the type of broad goals that high school graduates have, not people with several years of work experience trying to get into a masters program.  I would guess that your SOP was quite vague and unfocused as a result.
 
3.  Once you figure out what to do, find local orgs involved in that field and start sending out emails.  Contact the HR departments of these orgs and think tanks and see if they'll take on an unpaid volunteer/intern.   Look up alums from your undergrad institution and set up informational interviews.  You're not going to get a paid position with no relevant experience and zero connections.  You have to be willing to work for free.
 
4. Enroll in a summer or night course, preferably in microeconomics or something similar.  Show up to every class, ace every test, and get to know the professor.  Then ask the professor to write you a LOR.
 
5. Retake the GRE.  Q and AW scores are decent but not great.  Q is critical and due to the quantitative aspect of many policy schools, adcoms will look at that first.  The importance of AW is debatable, but a better score can't hurt, and if you are as smart as you say you are then a 5.0 should be easily attainable.  You want to give adcoms as many reasons as possible to think "his undergrad was a bit spotty but maybe he's got the maturity now to cut it here."  A 4.0 AW is just another excuse to throw your application in the trash bin.
 
7. Scratch your SOP and write a brand new one.  If you've done everything above then you have a much better understanding of your goals and what you have done and are willing to do to accomplish them.
 
Rutgers won't blow people away, but it is a good school, and as mentioned above, state schools usually have a good reputation and network locally since that is where most grads end up working.  George Mason and UMD College Park also have solid programs in the DC area if that's what you are set on.  Finally, I think you can get into GWU and Wagner if you put the effort in, but just be aware that your GPA will probably mean that funding is out of the question no matter how good the rest of your application is...so be prepared to fork over sticker price if it comes to that.

You didn't list GPPI but I'll throw this out there in case you end up considering it. Each cohort has around 100-120 full time MPPs depending on the year, and about 20 evening program/part time MPPs. The class of 2014 was closer to 120 full time and the largest entering class so far.

Core courses have 20-25 students and electives are 10-20. I have gotten to know several professors quite well even though I am just finishing my first semester. I only have my undergrad experience as a reference, so it's not really a fair comparison, but I'm pleased with my professors and can tell they enjoy teaching. If you are interested in social policy, you can look up Bill Gormley, Harry Holzer, Donna Morrison, and Mark Rom.

There are quite a few students with RA/GA/TAships. I don't know exactly how many are available, but a majority of people work/intern so the competition for them isn't as cutthroat as you would think. I have a GA position through the end of the year but will be looking to get some more diverse experience over the summer and going into next year. However, I feel like if I needed something more low key I could land another assistantship here without much difficulty.

Also I just noticed the OP was well over a month ago, but I already typed this out so I'm going to post it anyway in case it helps someone.

Work on your references...obviously the sub-3.0 GPA put you in a bad spot, but I think it was the LORs that really sunk you.  GPA is really the only thing that is outside of your control at this point - work experience and volunteering, GRE scores, your SOP, and LORs can all be improved up until the minute you hit the submit button on an application.  You didn't speak to the strength of the references, but just having an academic advisor writing one indicates you didn't make a positive impression on many of your professors.  What's more, adcoms were probably raising an eyebrow at the fact that you have 3 years of work experience but did not get professional reference from one of your bosses.  I don't know the reasons behind that but if I were looking at your application I would probably think that you are still haven't combined a sense of purpose and motivation with the natural intelligence that got you through high school, into an Ivy League, and good test scores.  Here's what you need to do.
 
1. Rethink your choice of references.  Do you know if the prof wrote a good letter or did he seem reluctant at all?  Dredge through your transcript for classes where you got an A or A-, preferably upper-level courses in econ, political science, math, etc.  Reach out to those profs even if you know they won't remember you, tell them what you have been up to and your future plans and see if you they will write LORs.  Contact your previous supervisors as well.
 
2. Sit down and figure out what you actually want to do.  Is it working on environmental policy?  At-risk youth?  It's cool to say you want to work in "government, the nonprofit sector, or in elected office" but those are the type of broad goals that high school graduates have, not people with several years of work experience trying to get into a masters program.  I would guess that your SOP was quite vague and unfocused as a result.
 
3.  Once you figure out what to do, find local orgs involved in that field and start sending out emails.  Contact the HR departments of these orgs and think tanks and see if they'll take on an unpaid volunteer/intern.   Look up alums from your undergrad institution and set up informational interviews.  You're not going to get a paid position with no relevant experience and zero connections.  You have to be willing to work for free.
 
4. Enroll in a summer or night course, preferably in microeconomics or something similar.  Show up to every class, ace every test, and get to know the professor.  Then ask the professor to write you a LOR.
 
5. Retake the GRE.  Q and AW scores are decent but not great.  Q is critical and due to the quantitative aspect of many policy schools, adcoms will look at that first.  The importance of AW is debatable, but a better score can't hurt, and if you are as smart as you say you are then a 5.0 should be easily attainable.  You want to give adcoms as many reasons as possible to think "his undergrad was a bit spotty but maybe he's got the maturity now to cut it here."  A 4.0 AW is just another excuse to throw your application in the trash bin.
 
7. Scratch your SOP and write a brand new one.  If you've done everything above then you have a much better understanding of your goals and what you have done and are willing to do to accomplish them.
 
Rutgers won't blow people away, but it is a good school, and as mentioned above, state schools usually have a good reputation and network locally since that is where most grads end up working.  George Mason and UMD College Park also have solid programs in the DC area if that's what you are set on.  Finally, I think you can get into GWU and Wagner if you put the effort in, but just be aware that your GPA will probably mean that funding is out of the question no matter how good the rest of your application is...so be prepared to fork over sticker price if it comes to that.

If I could like this 1000x I would. 
 
It is awful to think how selfish you are being right now.  What you have done in paying two deposits and simply going "in circles" is certainly not illegal, but it is unethical and defeats the good faith that all of these schools have put on you to weigh the pros/cons and make a decision in a timely manner.  You had plenty of time to make up your mind.  Just go to the "Waiting it out" section on this forum and read about the people who are still waiting to get into ONE school.  The longer you hold out means that one person on the Fletcher waitlist is going to miss out on his/her dream school and be forced to enroll elsewhere.  I understand that this is a major decision in your life, but it is rather disgusting to think that you might be one of my classmates at SIPA this fall because of what you are doing. 
 
Am I being too harsh on some random on an internet forum? Yeah, probably. Am I going to get a bunch of negatives?  Maybe.  Just grow up a little and think about the bigger picture.

It's not the fact that "everyone is probably as over this decision" as you are that should make you feel embarrassed.  
 
It's the fact that you're sitting on scholarship money at these institutions that could otherwise have really helped someone, or could have changed their decision.  Just like the "unexpected 2nd round funding from SIPA" changed your calculus.
 
And that's just selfish.  And shameful.  And sh+tty.
 
Either put on your big girl boots and pull the trigger or make a date with the Karma gods.  Your choice.

Hi. I think I can help answer some of these questions -- though my answers won't make it any easier for prospective students who aren't getting financial aid.  The Kennedy School is very expensive; Cambridge housing costs are crazy; and reasonably-priced daycare is especially hard to find. I wish we could make things less expensive.  It's distressing to recruit students to HKS only to have us fall short on financial aid. 
 
I chair the MPA admissions committees, and I'm sure that the MPP admissions committee operates this way, too: we have a need-blind admissions policy.  Applicants whom we think have money have *no* advantage over applicants whom we suspect will need a lot of aid.  (And if anyone -- ever -- raised the question of letting someone in because they have the ability to pay... that person would be shunned in the admissions committee and then drummed out.)
 
Our ethic in favor of need-blind admissions sometimes puts us in the uncomfortable position of turning down applicants who *would* have been funded by an employer/agency/non-profit.  For example, imagine that an agency guarantees the tuition for any state employee who is admitted to one of our MPA programs.  That guarantee would not come up in our discussions about an applicant's "fit to the program."  The bar for admission cannot be moved by a pre-existing grant or scholarship. We leave scholarship money on the table, unspent.  It happened with several scholarships this year alone. Because those pots of money were given to HKS to fund students from specific countries/states/agencies (and so on), we cannot spend the money elsewhere.
 
Harvard's endowment is huge, yes. But it's useful to remember that each school has only a slice of the endowment.  HKS has had to raise its own endowment.  We (and the Divinity School, and the Ed School) would *love* to have even a slice of the Law School or Business School endowments. Since we are a young school, and since we don't spin out millionare alumni, our endowment can't support the kinds of scholarships we'd like to see.
 
You shouldn't be surprised that many of us at HKS (and especially on the Admissions Committee) look at the Wilson School with envy. Of course... we'd rather teach here... but we wish we could fund our students as they do.  The Wilson School received a remarkable gift that set up their tuition endowment.  Tufts, too, has some good financial aid packages.  We're envious.
 
David Ellwood made financial aid his top priority when he became dean, and we have more of it than we used to have.  Much of it, though, has been given for candidates from specific places or backgrounds. There is more "general aid" available than there used to be, too -- but not enough to make anyone especially happy.  I *am* sorry.  You-all can leave, for another time, discussions about whether the money "should" be spent on an MPA. We can leave conversations about Placement and Career Services to another time, too. 
 
Today, though, with many of you deciding whether to go to HKS or elsewhere, I only wish that we (and they) had more resources to help folks out.

Work on your references...obviously the sub-3.0 GPA put you in a bad spot, but I think it was the LORs that really sunk you.  GPA is really the only thing that is outside of your control at this point - work experience and volunteering, GRE scores, your SOP, and LORs can all be improved up until the minute you hit the submit button on an application.  You didn't speak to the strength of the references, but just having an academic advisor writing one indicates you didn't make a positive impression on many of your professors.  What's more, adcoms were probably raising an eyebrow at the fact that you have 3 years of work experience but did not get professional reference from one of your bosses.  I don't know the reasons behind that but if I were looking at your application I would probably think that you are still haven't combined a sense of purpose and motivation with the natural intelligence that got you through high school, into an Ivy League, and good test scores.  Here's what you need to do.
 
1. Rethink your choice of references.  Do you know if the prof wrote a good letter or did he seem reluctant at all?  Dredge through your transcript for classes where you got an A or A-, preferably upper-level courses in econ, political science, math, etc.  Reach out to those profs even if you know they won't remember you, tell them what you have been up to and your future plans and see if you they will write LORs.  Contact your previous supervisors as well.
 
2. Sit down and figure out what you actually want to do.  Is it working on environmental policy?  At-risk youth?  It's cool to say you want to work in "government, the nonprofit sector, or in elected office" but those are the type of broad goals that high school graduates have, not people with several years of work experience trying to get into a masters program.  I would guess that your SOP was quite vague and unfocused as a result.
 
3.  Once you figure out what to do, find local orgs involved in that field and start sending out emails.  Contact the HR departments of these orgs and think tanks and see if they'll take on an unpaid volunteer/intern.   Look up alums from your undergrad institution and set up informational interviews.  You're not going to get a paid position with no relevant experience and zero connections.  You have to be willing to work for free.
 
4. Enroll in a summer or night course, preferably in microeconomics or something similar.  Show up to every class, ace every test, and get to know the professor.  Then ask the professor to write you a LOR.
 
5. Retake the GRE.  Q and AW scores are decent but not great.  Q is critical and due to the quantitative aspect of many policy schools, adcoms will look at that first.  The importance of AW is debatable, but a better score can't hurt, and if you are as smart as you say you are then a 5.0 should be easily attainable.  You want to give adcoms as many reasons as possible to think "his undergrad was a bit spotty but maybe he's got the maturity now to cut it here."  A 4.0 AW is just another excuse to throw your application in the trash bin.
 
7. Scratch your SOP and write a brand new one.  If you've done everything above then you have a much better understanding of your goals and what you have done and are willing to do to accomplish them.
 
Rutgers won't blow people away, but it is a good school, and as mentioned above, state schools usually have a good reputation and network locally since that is where most grads end up working.  George Mason and UMD College Park also have solid programs in the DC area if that's what you are set on.  Finally, I think you can get into GWU and Wagner if you put the effort in, but just be aware that your GPA will probably mean that funding is out of the question no matter how good the rest of your application is...so be prepared to fork over sticker price if it comes to that.

If GPPI is your top choice, then you have nothing to lose by asking for additional funding.  At the least I would advise waiting 3-4 weeks before making a decision because you might get an increase without even doing anything.

I definitely would, after all your that is where your career goals are.  Out of the core faculty David Konisky is most heavily involved in environmental policy so you could do a little research and mention him in your SOP as well.

You don't actually have to pick a concentration, they are optional.  If you send an email to gppiadmissions@georgetown.edu you can ask for the current list of concentration courses.  It's not posted online anymore because the actual offerings change each semester.

I don't really think there is any point to this pissing match, but if you are referring to the TRIP rankings (http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/TRIP%202011%20RESULTS%20US%20RESPONDENTS.pdf) then AU is indeed #8 and GWU is #7. However GWU is pretty clearly in the "second tier" and very close with Columbia, Tufts, and Princeton. Georgetown, JHU, and Harvard make up the top tier. AU is a great school and in these rankings is far ahead of others like DU, Yale, etc, but the gap between 20% and 38% is notable.

I don't really think there is any point to this pissing match, but if you are referring to the TRIP rankings (http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/TRIP%202011%20RESULTS%20US%20RESPONDENTS.pdf) then AU is indeed #8 and GWU is #7. However GWU is pretty clearly in the "second tier" and very close with Columbia, Tufts, and Princeton. Georgetown, JHU, and Harvard make up the top tier. AU is a great school and in these rankings is far ahead of others like DU, Yale, etc, but the gap between 20% and 38% is notable.

I don't really think there is any point to this pissing match, but if you are referring to the TRIP rankings (http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/TRIP%202011%20RESULTS%20US%20RESPONDENTS.pdf) then AU is indeed #8 and GWU is #7. However GWU is pretty clearly in the "second tier" and very close with Columbia, Tufts, and Princeton. Georgetown, JHU, and Harvard make up the top tier. AU is a great school and in these rankings is far ahead of others like DU, Yale, etc, but the gap between 20% and 38% is notable.

I don't really think there is any point to this pissing match, but if you are referring to the TRIP rankings (http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/TRIP%202011%20RESULTS%20US%20RESPONDENTS.pdf) then AU is indeed #8 and GWU is #7. However GWU is pretty clearly in the "second tier" and very close with Columbia, Tufts, and Princeton. Georgetown, JHU, and Harvard make up the top tier. AU is a great school and in these rankings is far ahead of others like DU, Yale, etc, but the gap between 20% and 38% is notable.

I don't really think there is any point to this pissing match, but if you are referring to the TRIP rankings (http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/TRIP%202011%20RESULTS%20US%20RESPONDENTS.pdf) then AU is indeed #8 and GWU is #7. However GWU is pretty clearly in the "second tier" and very close with Columbia, Tufts, and Princeton. Georgetown, JHU, and Harvard make up the top tier. AU is a great school and in these rankings is far ahead of others like DU, Yale, etc, but the gap between 20% and 38% is notable.

I don't really think there is any point to this pissing match, but if you are referring to the TRIP rankings (http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/TRIP%202011%20RESULTS%20US%20RESPONDENTS.pdf) then AU is indeed #8 and GWU is #7. However GWU is pretty clearly in the "second tier" and very close with Columbia, Tufts, and Princeton. Georgetown, JHU, and Harvard make up the top tier. AU is a great school and in these rankings is far ahead of others like DU, Yale, etc, but the gap between 20% and 38% is notable.

I can speak from personal experience and say that I had a very bad semester early in undergrad with two F's and a D-. Even better, two of those courses were in my major. I retook them under my school's course forgiveness program and got much better grades, but they do still show up on my transcript, it just indicates that I repeated them and the original grades have been excluded from my GPA. I didn't address it at all in my SOP, and I was admitted to every school I applied to, including GPPI, Ford, SAIS, etc. So to answer your first question, your chances are very good.

As for your second question, none of the schools I applied to asked for an explanation of a failing grade. However, there is a section on some school's applications where it asks "Have you ever been the subject of disciplinary or academic action at any college or university? If yes, what were the circumstances?" Obviously you are going to want to be 100% truthful. I believe you can be confident that your information would be kept confidential. Admissions Directors just don't have time to share dirt on 1000+ applicants with all their peers, and that's besides the professionalism/integrity issues. Whether your history will have a big impact on your chances, I can't predict. I will say that your specific case seems to be comparatively minor - it is not on the same level as sneaking answers into an exam room, plagiarizing other work, or paying someone else to write your papers. If I were in your shoes I would apply to all the programs you are interested in without hesitation. The cost of grad school is > $100k, do you really want to wonder years down the road if you could have gone to your dream school but didn't even try because you didn't want to spend $80 on the application fee?

I submitted an application but instead of responding to the prompt I said how much rose1 and dcenergygirl deserve this scholarship. Hope that helped them decide

I am glad to hear others are facing similar decisions. I'm glad I'm not crazy for taking on more debt for just a bit more name recognition. Well... maybe I am crazy for doing that, but at least I am in good company.





I think visiting campus would make my decision much easier. Unfortunately I won't be back in the States until I move permanently back in July. I am having to rely on the opinions of current and former students, and a few former bosses who adjunct at one or both of the programs. It's useful, but I would rather get a feel for the campuses themselves.

That said, having gleaned more information about the curriculum from correspondences with current students at Georgetown, I feel much more at ease with the comparability between GW and GU. You're correct in that there probably isn't anything I can get at GW I cannot get at Georgetown. Barring, that is, a bit more pocket money...




One of the first things my mother said when I got into Georgetown was "[insert squeal] I get to go buy Georgetown sweatshirts now!." That has rung in my head in the weeks since. Thanks, Mom.

A big part of my decision to attend LBJ was financial. I was accepted to a couple of DC schools, but with little financial aid. Between the higher tuition and higher cost of living in DC, I was looking at about $80,000 more over two years to go to school in DC. As much as I wanted to go to school in DC, I knew that I wanted to go in to government or NGO work and I just couldn't bring myself to spend $80k more to be in DC. On the other hand, between financial aid, working, my savings, and the lower cost of living in Austin, I graduated from LBJ debt-free which was a great feeling to have when I graduated since it meant that I had more options and didn't have to take the highest paying or first job that came along.

If you're interested in working for the federal government, where you go to school will have very little effect on your starting salary. The salary determination process is more or less an equation of education + work experience = GS level X, step Y. The brand name of a school might make a difference in opening doors at NGOs and make a small salary difference, but probably not a big enough difference to offset much extra debt since salaries are generally lower in the NGO/non-profit sector. If you've got your heart set on consulting, then the extra debt to attend a more prestigious program might be worth it, but if you change your mind partway through the program you could be stuck with consulting anyway to pay off the debt. If you come in to the masters as a mid-career student with a lot of work experience though, you could have a higher salary after graduation, so a larger debt payment might not be as big of a problem.

After graduation, I started working with the federal government at a little over 55K in DC, which is more or less average for someone with a master's and a couple of years of work experience. After taxes, social security, etc, I was left with a little less than 40k/year to live on. That's manageable in DC especially since I'm single, but if I had a large student loan payment like the $600-$900/mo payments you can incur if you take out $60K-$80K of loans or had a family, it would be really tough to live in the DC area on that. My salary has gone up a bit in the almost 3 years since I graduated, but it would still be tough if I had a huge loan payment every month. Without debt, I'm able to live comfortably, though not lavishly, save for future needs, and put away some money towards a down payment on a condo/house later on.

Also, being in DC can give you a leg up in networking, especially for the private sector and NGOs, but all of the big policy schools will have a decent alumni network in DC and the big employers of MPP/MPA/IR grads will hit the big policy schools. We had recruiters at LBJ from a lot of government agencies, several consulting firms, and many different international and DC-based NGO/Non-profits. So, while I was initially a little apprehensive about going to school outside of DC, I don't really think it hurt me in the long run. I got 2 great federal internships and then was eventually hired by one of them. Now, I'm in DC and have been able to take advantage of the LBJ alumni network here and build my own network through my current job and living in DC.

It's ultimately a personal decision, since everyone has a different tolerance for debt, but I generally don't think that a lot of debt is advisable or necessary for most MPP/MPA/IR grads since salaries are not usually that high. I also think that the name of the school, while not irrelevant, is not as important in the public and NGO/Non-profit sector as it is in the private sector. So, paying big bucks for a name brand is not as important as it might be for law schools or MBA programs. For example, a person that I met at an admitted student day for LBJ when I was trying to decide where to go ultimately turned down LBJ to go to HKS. We now work for the same employer, doing the same job with the same promotion potential, and my salary's actually a bit higher because I had a little more work experience before being hired. He has a ton of debt that he's trying to manage, but I don't.

I also think that, if you don't have a good match between program fit and financial aid, it is worth taking another year to work on your application package and/or research other schools. If you got in to top ranked program X with no funding, chances are good you'll get in there again or at least in to a similar program if you apply later. In the mean time, you can do things to improve your application package like trying to boost your GRE, improve your resume, improve your statements of purpose, etc. You can also consider casting a wider net when you apply to schools the second time around because maybe you can get in to slightly lower ranked school Y with decent funding and have similar career prospects after graduation.

Ranking is just ordering everyone on the waitlist. Then next month if they find out there will be 50 open spots, they would contact the people #1-50 on the waitlist and offer admission. If those people decline they would keep going down the list.

Being unranked means that all waitlisted applicants are put into one pool. In the same situation a month from now with 50 open slots, the admissions commitee would sit down and review all the applicants to determine who they want to offer. The advantage of this is that they get another chance to bring in the class they want by having good balance between the different concentrations, enough international diversity, etc.

do you seriously need me to explain why the harvard kennedy school is not on par with harvard law school or harvard business school? lol...