Stanford IPS

[policywonk64]

Hey -- I posted here under a different username a while ago (forgot what that was) -- so I apologize for the new username. I'm fine-tuning my list of where I'd like to apply this Fall. I'll be taking my GRE in July. I was wondering if any of you knew the admission rate / selectivity for Stanford's IPS program. Specifically, I'll be applying for the joint MIPS and MPP program. Here's what Stanford says about joint-degree admission, "Applicants should apply to the Ford Dorsey program, indicating an interest in the joint program. There is one admissions application and one fee. When a decision is made by the Ford Dorsey program to admit such a student to the MIPS program, that student’s file is forwarded to the M.P.P. program director. " I'm not sure if that means that there's some degree of separate consideration for those interested in the dual-degree program or not.

Secondly, I wanted to see what you all thought about my chances for this dual-degree MIPS / MPP program at Stanford. For MIPS my area of concentration would be energy, environment, and natural resources.

I'm also applying to Princeton's MPA, KSG's MPP, and Berkeley's MPP. So, your thoughts on those schools would be appreciated as well.

Here are my stats:

Undergrad: UC Berkeley (College of Natural Resources).

Major: Society and Environment

GPA: 3.9

GRE: Taking in July. What would you say about 650s in both? Too low?

Age: 22 (23 at Time of Application)

Pre-Req Courses: Political Economics (A); Macroeconomics (A); Microeconomics (A); Statistics ( B )

Work Experience:

San Jose City Council

Policy Analyst 2 Years (at time of application / post-college)

My policy portfolio includes: budget, education, housing, water, park funding, labor, economic development, redevelopment agency, BART, airport, marijuana, tobacco, and environmental issues. It's a pretty substantive and un-embellished role.

U.S. Senate

Legislative Intern (Energy / International Narcotics Issues)

6 months (post-college)

The White House

(Council on Environmental Quality)

Legislative Affairs Intern

Summer Intern (post-college)

Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice

Public Outreach Consultant

3 Months (contract position -- during college, paid job)

Fund For Public Interest Research

Field Manager / Campaign and Lobby Coordinator

1 Year (30 hours a week during college -- paid job)

Organized grassroots campaigns for Environment California's campaigns on toxic run-off, climate change, and public transit.

Edited May 30, 2011 by policywonk64

[Bukharan]

Hi! I don't have much to comment as I don't know about that programme. Your internships, obviously, look awesome.

Regarding the GRE, aim higher. 650s in Quant is about 60th percentile. Quant should probably be 770-800. Just study hardcore for the test; unfortunately there is no other way - and trust me, GRE is very doable.

[charlotte_asia]

Hi! I don't have much to comment as I don't know about that programme. Your internships, obviously, look awesome.

Regarding the GRE, aim higher. 650s in Quant is about 60th percentile. Quant should probably be 770-800. Just study hardcore for the test; unfortunately there is no other way - and trust me, GRE is very doable.

Bukharan, I'm jealous/happy for you that you are going to IPS! That is one of my top choices. Could you share your stats/background? I also posted mine in a separate thread; I think it's just below this one on the forum. If you have any thoughts on my chances I'd love to hear them. My quant is unfortunately low and that's one of my concerns right now.

Thanks! And good luck to the OP for your application as well!

[Bukharan]

Bukharan, I'm jealous/happy for you that you are going to IPS! That is one of my top choices. Could you share your stats/background? I also posted mine in a separate thread; I think it's just below this one on the forum. If you have any thoughts on my chances I'd love to hear them. My quant is unfortunately low and that's one of my concerns right now.

Thanks! And good luck to the OP for your application as well!

Nope, nope, nope. As I said, I don't know much about the IPS - in fact, I had to google it for the full name. I am enrolling next year in History. So, hopefully, by the time you are 'in' (fingers crossed) and I am done with the busy first year in my own (History) programme, we may attend some joint interdisciplinary workshops or something.

The very best to all of you applying.

[Zahar Berkut]

Stanford IPS has an incredible faculty roster, yet somehow is still considered less competitive than the "top tier" international affairs APSIA grad programs like SAIS and Fletcher. Speaking of which, have you looked into these programs? Or are you strictly applying to programs that offer both an international and "domestic" public policy component?

I agree with Bukharan that you're very competitive, but proposing a focus in a quantitative field really behooves you to have as high a quant score as you can get.

(As for your first question, I can only assume there is a possibility of secondary scrutiny when passing your accepted application on, but I can think of very few reasons why they wouldn't take someone already admitted to IPS if they explained their justification for the dual degree well enough.)

[foodlover28]

I was admitted to IPS this year. From my understanding, it's not difficult at all to do the dual MIPA / MPP. however, In my personal opinion there is little gain in doing so, since the core curricula are nearly identical. the MPP program at Stanford is very small and collaborate with IPS students in the final project, so you'll be working with them already. If there are particular MPP courses that you're interested in, you can take them as your electives.

[globalsun]

Hi,

I think you have sufficient work experience and should not have problem meeting the minimum prerequisite requirements. I would try to improve the GRE quant score to above 700 (ideally 750 which is the mean for entering students). IPS has a 20-25% acceptance rate, though its becoming more selective each year. Fletcher, SAIS, and SIPA all have acceptance rates in the 30% range and lower mean GRE scores.

As I know only one individual who has done the MPP/MIPS program and it might not be necessarily for most students as the 2 programs share a good chunk of the core classes. You can always apply for the joint MPP in your first or second year. The criteria for MPP acceptance is good performance in quantitative microeconomic courses, 700+ GRE quantitative scores and native english skills.

Overall given your interests in energy and the environment, Stanford is really an unbeatable place to study the field. Compared to the other programs like Princeton's MPA, KSG's MPP, and Berkeley's MPP, IPS is much more internationally focused. Out of those 3 schools only Berkeley has a Energy/Environmental department that can rival Stanford's, though Princeton and Harvard do have some centers of excellence. But to be taken seriously in the energy/environmental in the field, you need to go to a school with great engineering/science program. I do hope people interesting in energy/environment and who are applying to traditional IR schools like Fletcher, SAIS, or Georgetown realize that.

[itsfridayfriday]

I really think that this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in a while. as someone who has worked in the industry for the past five years, the energy/environmental field is just like any other -- you need smart, engaged people in all aspects of the field with all kinds of training.

Here are a few very successful folks in the energy/environment field who do not have a science/engineering background, many of whom are graduates from the schools you put down:

Government, Christina Romer: http://en.wikipedia....Christina_Romer

Think tank/Government, David Sandalow: http://www.brookings...09sandalow.aspx

Business, John Woodlard: http://www.brightsou...management_team

Business, Andy Safran: http://reffwallstree...d=146&Itemid=77

Business, Vikram S. Mehta: http://www.shell.com...kram_mehta.html

Diplomacy/Government, Bill Richardson: http://en.wikipedia....Bill_Richardson

Small business, basically anybody at Garten Rothkopf: http://www.gartenrot...ut-us/team.html

Government/business, Joseph Adda: http://en.wikipedia....oseph_Kofi_Adda

An engineering background isn't going to help you advocate in Washington (or in the states), and a science background isn't going to better help you sell a company's product or better manage a client relationship. your own skillset and ability to persuade, build consensus, and knowledge will. To be honest it sounds like you haven't been in the energy/environment industry (or, frankly, the working world) very long to know what accounts for success in within it.

But to be taken seriously in the energy/environmental in the field, you need to go to a school with great engineering/science program. I do hope people interesting in energy/environment and who are applying to traditional IR schools like Fletcher, SAIS, or Georgetown realize that.

Edited June 9, 2011 by itsfridayfriday

[policywonk64]

I don't think I'd go so far as saying that what globalsun said is "one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in a while" -- but I do disagree with it.

It really just depends on what type of job and which sector you want to end up in. There are certainly jobs out there that prefer sciency backgrounds. Examples that come to mind include numeruos Federal and State Agency related jobs i.e. DOE, EPA, DOA, DOI. There are certainly policy jobs there that prefer candidates to have strong comfort with science. It's an important skill to have when you're working on that side of policy.

That said -- and I can only speak from my experience -- if you're interested on the political-policy or legislative body side of policy, you certainly do not need a science background. Frankly, I question how much you need as graduate degree at all. Policy in the political sector is all about work experience, networking, and investing time in an office. I remember the Chief of Staff at the US Senate talking one of my bosses (a Legislative Correspondent -- one step below Legislative Assistant) out of going to graduate school. He said, "Why get a graduate degree when once year in the Senate is the equivalent of a MA in Power Politics?" Also, note that the COS only had a Bachelors. Out of my two other bosses -- who handled enviro issues -- only one of them had a graduate degree and it didn't have any science background. Compartively, when I was interning at the White House -- I was working in one of their offices that handled environmental/energy issues. One of my bosses had an MPP from the Kennedy School and the other had a Masters in Environmental Management from Duke. The current Chief of Staff for that department within the WH just has an MPA. The large majority of people I met working there did not have a sciency background. But almost all of them did work on Obama's campaign. You want to get to the top fast? Jump on a campaign early. Oh how I wish I was precinct walking in Iowa in 2007...

My point is: it really depends on where you want to work and what you want to do. Whether it's a think tank, a nonprofit, an Agency job, or policy in the poltiical world -- it all depends.

[itsfridayfriday]

we're in agreement. it's true that a lot of policy jobs do prefer/need a science background. but those jobs tend to want want degrees in the field, not a few courses supplemented as a part of a policy master's program. someone who has a bs + mpp is on the same playing field as bs + mpp plus a few courses from a strong engineering school. it's the bs that counts, not the few classes you may have taken as a grad student. either you're an engineer/scientist or not (as signified by a degree), and a few classes doesn't change the core of your training (and the bulk of what you have to offer an employer).

I don't think I'd go so far as saying that what globalsun said is "one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in a while" -- but I do disagree with it.

It really just depends on what type of job and which sector you want to end up in. There are certainly jobs out there that prefer sciency backgrounds. Examples that come to mind include numeruos Federal and State Agency related jobs i.e. DOE, EPA, DOA, DOI. There are certainly policy jobs there that prefer candidates to have strong comfort with science. It's an important skill to have when you're working on that side of policy.

That said -- and I can only speak from my experience -- if you're interested on the political-policy or legislative body side of policy, you certainly do not need a science background. Frankly, I question how much you need as graduate degree at all. Policy in the political sector is all about work experience, networking, and investing time in an office. I remember the Chief of Staff at the US Senate talking one of my bosses (a Legislative Correspondent -- one step below Legislative Assistant) out of going to graduate school. He said, "Why get a graduate degree when once year in the Senate is the equivalent of a MA in Power Politics?" Also, note that the COS only had a Bachelors. Out of my two other bosses -- who handled enviro issues -- only one of them had a graduate degree and it didn't have any science background. Compartively, when I was interning at the White House -- I was working in one of their offices that handled environmental/energy issues. One of my bosses had an MPP from the Kennedy School and the other had a Masters in Environmental Management from Duke. The current Chief of Staff for that department within the WH just has an MPA. The large majority of people I met working there did not have a sciency background. But almost all of them did work on Obama's campaign. You want to get to the top fast? Jump on a campaign early. Oh how I wish I was precinct walking in Iowa in 2007...

My point is: it really depends on where you want to work and what you want to do. Whether it's a think tank, a nonprofit, an Agency job, or policy in the poltiical world -- it all depends.

[globalsun]

My observations were based on the need to have an interdisciplinary education to understand interdisciplinary issues like energy, especially for those without an undergraduate science background. I fail to understand the rationale of having an energy policy degree if the program provides no direct way to seriously engage the engineering and scientific experts in the field. Its no wonder that Washington policy wonks are so easily fooled by boondoggles like corn ethanol, clean coal, and hydrogen cars.

As with the individuals bios you diligently linked to, most did not attend the three above mention IR specialist schools that were at the heart of the critique or do not even work in the energy/environmental field (Romer). I do not know why you included Bill Richardson since he is career politician who was absolute failure in crafting a sustainable energy policy during his term at the DOE. And presenting one small boutique consulting firm mostly staffed by alums of the same school does not seem like a vote of confidence to me.

Finally, if you haven't noticed, this country has an absolutely broken energy policy. And I think some portion of it can be attributed to people who have limited interested in the sciences, but a lot of "passion" in networking.

P.S. the personal attacks do not belong the Gradcafe no matter how much more experienced you think you have.

I really think that this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in a while. as someone who has worked in the industry for the past five years, the energy/environmental field is just like any other -- you need smart, engaged people in all aspects of the field with all kinds of training.

Here are a few very successful folks in the energy/environment field who do not have a science/engineering background, many of whom are graduates from the schools you put down:

Government, Christina Romer: http://en.wikipedia....Christina_Romer

Think tank/Government, David Sandalow: http://www.brookings...09sandalow.aspx

Business, John Woodlard: http://www.brightsou...management_team

Business, Andy Safran: http://reffwallstree...d=146&Itemid=77

Business, Vikram S. Mehta: http://www.shell.com...kram_mehta.html

Diplomacy/Government, Bill Richardson: http://en.wikipedia....Bill_Richardson

Small business, basically anybody at Garten Rothkopf: http://www.gartenrot...ut-us/team.html

Government/business, Joseph Adda: http://en.wikipedia....oseph_Kofi_Adda

An engineering background isn't going to help you advocate in Washington (or in the states), and a science background isn't going to better help you sell a company's product or better manage a client relationship. your own skillset and ability to persuade, build consensus, and knowledge will. To be honest it sounds like you haven't been in the energy/environment industry (or, frankly, the working world) very long to know what accounts for success in within it.

[itsfridayfriday]

this articulation makes a lot more sense (and is a lot more becoming) -- i see your perspective and agree with engaging science/engineering experts. i don't necessarily agree that a few classes can help that deficiency (rather, someone with an exclusively policy background could simply make the space for someone with a science one). that is to say, the field can be interdiscplinary without the degree being so as well. that said, i totally agree with your comment on broken energy policy -- but i still stand by the assertion that these degrees prepare you for success in the field (as it is a varied and diverse one) since making changes more is about the person and their dynamic thinking and less about their training.

My observations were based on the need to have an interdisciplinary education to understand interdisciplinary issues like energy, especially for those without an undergraduate science background. I fail to understand the rationale of having an energy policy degree if the program provides no direct way to seriously engage the engineering and scientific experts in the field. Its no wonder that Washington policy wonks are so easily fooled by boondoggles like corn ethanol, clean coal, and hydrogen cars.

As with the individuals bios you diligently linked to, most did not attend the three above mention IR specialist schools that were at the heart of the critique or do not even work in the energy/environmental field (Romer). I do not know why you included Bill Richardson since he is career politician who was absolute failure in crafting a sustainable energy policy during his term at the DOE. And presenting one small boutique consulting firm mostly staffed by alums of the same school does not seem like a vote of confidence to me.

Finally, if you haven't noticed, this country has an absolutely broken energy policy. And I think some portion of it can be attributed to people who have limited interested in the sciences, but a lot of "passion" in networking.

P.S. the personal attacks do not belong the Gradcafe no matter how much more experienced you think you have.

Edited June 12, 2011 by itsfridayfriday

[globalsun]

While a few classes in the actual science of energy cannot make you a qualified scientist in a particular field, it is a more credible way to ensure that one understands the dynamics of the energy complex system, instead of merely the political or economic aspects. I do agree in the end that the formal academic training is not the only way to become qualified in the field, but I do think studying in a program that requires several rigorous science and engineering courses is a more optimal path than a program without such opportunities. Unless they seriously dig deeply into the topic in their personal spare time, I honestly believe that individuals without the formal science training will not fully understand the practicality of the hydrogen fueled car vs a electric car, or the sustainability of the biofuels.

this articulation makes a lot more sense (and is a lot more becoming) -- i see your perspective and agree with engaging science/engineering experts. i don't necessarily agree that a few classes can help that deficiency (rather, someone with an exclusively policy background could simply make the space for someone with a science one). that is to say, the field can be interdiscplinary without the degree being so as well. that said, i totally agree with your comment on broken energy policy -- but i still stand by the assertion that these degrees prepare you for success in the field (as it is a varied and diverse one) since making changes more is about the person and their dynamic thinking and less about their training.

[Sustainability Enthusiast]

Hey everyone.... I was wondering if someone can help me out with some more information on Stanford's IPS Program...

 

I have lots of questions for which I seek some genuine advice...

 

1. Would someone have an idea about the average salary post graduation from Stanford IPS or just advise a range of salaries for this program..

 

2. How reputed is the Stanford IPS Program vis-a-vis the established MPA program at Columbia SIPA .Further, how do organizations/corporates/ngos/multilaterals view this course ?

 

4. If you study at Stanford IPS, would you be allowed to take up courses with Stanford Law School and business school  ?

 

5. My idea will be to go for a management consulting. Do you think I can carve that niche from this program ?

 

6. While I understand the alumni network for this program is building up slowly. Do you think one can leverage the alumni network of Stanford university as a whole, while studying in this program ?

 

7. How difficult would it be to find an internship or job in New York or Washington DC if you are studying in California ?

 

8. Do World Bank, UN, IMF, other multilateral and bilaterals hire from this program ?

 

9. What are the chances for getting RA/TA for the 2nd year ? 

 

10. What is the general background of peers for this course ?

 

 

Would be grateful if someone could respond to my questions... Thanks     

[ipsofacto]

1. Would someone have an idea about the average salary post graduation from Stanford IPS or just advise a range of salaries for this program.

 

This depends entirely on the field you enter and your experience.  To put a number on it, you can expect to make between 35k and 150k a year.  IPS does not, to my knowledge, publish this data, but if you contact the admissions committee they may be able to share knowledge with you 1:1.  BTW you should know that there is personalized career counseling at IPS, and the program deputy director will reach out to contacts on your behalf in order to start the conversation, gauge interest, etc.  She’s also great about connecting you to program alums so they can give advice on a particular industry or organization.     

 

2. How reputed is the Stanford IPS Program vis-a-vis the established MPA program at Columbia SIPA .Further, how do organizations/corporates/ngos/multilaterals view this course ?

 

Very reputed, IPS alums are doing some awesome, awesome things.  In terms of comparing it with other schools, I think the nice thing about Stanford’s program is that it doesn’t fall into one single category.  My classmates are serving in the military, in governments, working for startups, helping incubate startups, etc.  What I think Stanford offers that would be hard to find elsewhere is the social entrepreneurship resources, both within the program (several awesome companies have been borne out of the program, and people are involved with the field in many ways since graduation) and also across the University for IPS students to leverage. 

 

4. If you study at Stanford IPS, would you be allowed to take up courses with Stanford Law School and business school?

 

Yes, but you may not get to take every single class.  As a general rule, most programs, including IPS have a number of core courses reserved for students of that program only, and a number of classes that are electives open to the University.  You are welcome to take cross-registered classes anywhere.  Beyond that it’s up to the professor. 

 

5. My idea will be to go for a management consulting. Do you think I can carve that niche from this program?

 

Yes, you can definitely do management consulting from IPS.  All the top firms recruit here.  The key to consulting is kicking ass on the case studies -- your program doesn't matter as much as doing well on that front.  I’ve heard of students doing it though I don’t know anyone personally.     

 

6. While I understand the alumni network for this program is building up slowly. Do you think one can leverage the alumni network of Stanford university as a whole, while studying in this program?

 

I wouldn’t say the network is building up slowly – there’s an awesome, diverse, robust network in place and lots of people have gotten jobs through their peers.  But yes, you can leverage the alumni network of Stanford while in the program. 

 

7. How difficult would it be to find an internship or job in New York or Washington DC if you are studying in California ?

 

Really easy.  Lots of IPS students intern in DC and NYC while in California.  In DC there's a "Stanford house" where you can get housing over the summer, and lots of meetups so you can connect with peers. 

 

8. Do World Bank, UN, IMF, other multilateral and bilaterals hire from this program ?

 

Yes.  Lots of World Bank, IMF, and UNDP alums. 

 

9. What are the chances for getting RA/TA for the 2nd year ?

 

Very good – but you have to have a skill, and be willing to compete. 

 

Around 5 students or so each year TA introductory economics, which pays your full tuition and a living stipend.  One student each year TAs the IPS intro courses.  So there are at least six or so “set” positions that will be offered.  But applications for these are pretty competitive, as it’s a sweet deal. 

 

Other RA-ships depend entirely on your expertise.  Some students wrote books with visiting scholars, others RA or TA for Condi Rice, or find other courses around the university (business, law, etc.) where they can TA or RA. 

 

10. What is the general background of peers for this course ?

 

Amazing – students are so smart, well rounded, mature, and inspiring.  For specific profiles, you should search LinkedIn.

[ipsofacto]

Also check out for more information about the program. 

[Sustainability Enthusiast]

Hey IPSOFACTO 

 

Thanks a ton for this !!

 

I have another question with regards to housing and Admission fee..

 

Where do u recommend that one stays on-campus or off-campus ? ( while saving money will always be a priority so asking this question with regards to greater opportunity )

 

Also, where exactly, in terms of location, should one look for housing, if he/she is looking at an off campus option ? Also is there a website or facebook page one can visit to understand the various options ?

 

 

I haven't been able to secure a fellowship, so the fee is substantially high $44,184. How much in your opinion and from your experience should be the expense for an average student for one year, inclusive of everything. 

 

Further if you get the opportunity to pursue RA/TAship,  how does that affect your finances ? ( does it eliminate the tuition fee entirely or do you still have to pay a part of it and what is the stipend like ?

 

Thanks for helping me out....