How to pick best PA programs to apply to (for me!)?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

jjbb127

New Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am already post-bac and currently pursuing a MPH in my home state of NJ. I plan on applying to PA school for the 2022 cycle after I'm done with my MPH. I've been looking at schools near my geographic area (tri-state area, plus a couple of Northeastern schools). One thing I've noticed by looking at curriculums is that they vary greatly between schools. Some include a handful of public health courses along with the standard PA program requirements. Additionally, some only have one elective offering for clerkships, there's variety between extracurriculars, etc, etc, etc.

Does anyone have any advice on picking a school based on yourself? So how do I know what might be the best PA programs for me? Are there any key indicators? I'm trying to not apply to 20 schools but rather narrow it down to ones that best suit my academic interests. Any advice would help and be greatly appreciated.

An additional question: does having an MPH make me a more competitive candidate for PA school?

Members don't see this ad.
 
I don't think a MPH will help much. All the schools have the same classes for the first year, but the second year rotations can vary a lot. There's quite a bit of paperwork to apply.
 
Curriculums are standardized across programs per ARC-PA; if a school is adding on additional public health courses, it doesn't necessarily make them better or worse. The vast majority of PAs are working in a clinical setting; I'm not aware of many who work in Public Health or Epidemiology because that's not really what the design of PA school is oriented towards.

When considering what PA schools to apply to: PANCE pass rates>Financial Costs>Accreditation Status

The biggest thing to consider is how many students in each cohort are passing PANCE on the first attempt; this generally speaks to how well the program prepares you for getting licensed. Next is overall costs for attending the program (including CoL, incidentals, etc.); many students will accrue >100k in debt, so lessening your debt load as much as possible is key. Finally, what is the accreditation status of the schools you're interested in; if any school on your list is on "Probation," best to steer clear unless you're saving so much money on attending and their cohorts are passing at near 100% that you're willing to take the risk.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
A major consideration is the quality of rotation sites. Older programs tend to have more and better sites than newer programs.
Cost and geography are certainly issues as well. If you would be miserable in N Dakota, don't apply to a program there. There is something to be said for attending a program in the area you desire to work in after graduation. It can help , but isn't a necessity. Shameless plug for my Alma Mater, since it is in your area. I attended Hahnemann(now Drexel) in the 90s and could not have asked for a better experience. Great rotation sites and the ability to create a specialty focus within the required rotations set me up very well for a career in emergency medicine.
See www.physicianassistantforum.com for better input from thousands of PAs, instead of the dozen or so who post here.
An MPH is nice as it allows you to get a DrPH after PA school if you desire to return for a doctorate(as most folks will likely do in the near future , due to market pressures).
 
An MPH is nice as it allows you to get a DrPH after PA school if you desire to return for a doctorate(as most folks will likely do in the near future , due to market pressures).
Most people will opt to get a doctorate in something in addition to their PA degree? I don’t know a single PA (and I know a bunch) who has a doctorate in anything. I’m not seeing that changing in the near future either. When I wanted to be a PA, I got an interview to a program that tacked on an MPH to the PA degree. It added a year onto an already incredibly expensive program, which would have been >$175k of just tuition..... and didn’t include living expenses. Then I could graduate and make $85k, just like all the PAs who went to school for 2 years and paid $100k, and got started a year earlier than I would have. The MPH would have been a novelty for an employer that would only see my value as a prescriber.

DNPs don’t provide NPs anything more as far as salary when you are prescribing side by side with masters degree NPs. The DNP shines in that it has potential to get you into positions of influence over policy, and sometimes management roles. PAs don’t need to keep up with that because there simply aren’t many roles that fit them into an executive or administration dynamic. I simply was not going to get an MPH at the expense of another $100k+, and an extra year or more of lost income just to make the same money as the guy who didn’t get one. Incidentally, they start PAs here at around what I was making as an RN when I finished NP school.

Incidentally, I may tack on a DNP to my masters, purely for marketing sake for my door if I go all in on private practice someday. I actually think I can hire PAs in states that have OTP, because my practice can offer the oversight.
 
PAMAC- I am a bit closer to the pulse of the PA profession. There are now 5 or 6 specific DMSc programs for PAs only(Lynchburg, Rocky Mtn, ATSU, Butler, LMU, etc) each graduating 50-60 students/term as well as many DHSc programs open to any health care professional with a masters, and of course generic doctorates that anyone can do. I think 10 years from now most PA programs will at least have a doctoral option. The first such program(George Fox) started this year. The NPs went to a DNP standard. The PAs will go to a doctoral standard as well to remain competitive. I know > 200 PAs with doctorates at this point. I have had one for 6 years. Many of my friends do or are currently in programs. I teach for a doctoral program that has 75 students per cohort with a new cohort starting every 3 months.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You could hire a PA to work with you in your practice. You could mentor them but not "supervise" them any more than a PA who hires an NP. You could fire them, but could not be their medical board collaborator of record. Only a physician can do that.
 
PAMAC- I am a bit closer to the pulse of the PA profession. There are now 5 or 6 specific DMSc programs for PAs only(Lynchburg, Rocky Mtn, ATSU, Butler, LMU, etc) as well as many DHSc programs open to any health care professional with a masters. I think 10 years from now most PA programs will at least have a doctoral option. The first such program(George Fox) started this year. The NPs went to a DNP standard. The PAs will go to a doctoral standard as well to remain competitive. I know > 100 PAs with doctorates at this point. I have had one for 6 years. Many of my friends do or are currently in programs.
Those PAs with doctorates aren’t the brand new folks coming into the field, and there is a difference between programs offering that on a post grad basis for personal development vs tacking it to the degree as a barrier for graduation like many of the NP programs that have transitioned away from the masters degree NP option entirely. You know hundreds of PAs with doctorates, and I know zero PAs with them. The ones you know wiith them probably all pursued them after a decade or more in the field. Also, all those programs you mentioned that offer the PA only doctorate... private institutions. Why? They want the extra revenue.

Look at the new PA laws in Utah. I may be wrong, but there was a lot of scuttlebutt about them being pushed by one of the for profit doctorate programs so that PAs would opt for their doctorate in order to have expanded scope of practice.

So why would anyone tack on the extra time and money to become a PA when they could go to a 3 year medical program, and then hit the ground as a resident for a few more years and become a physician? A lot of PA programs are 28 months or more, so why add on a doctorate as the entry level standard for those folks?
 
Some of the new doctoral programs have 2 cohorts, folks who are continuation students who just finished their masters and community members who come from outside programs and have a masters. Pretty much everyone who graduates from Lynchburg, for example, continues on immediately into the doctoral option.
I don't disagree with you about PA vs MD/DO. If I was starting over I would not become a PA. There are several reasons to get a doctorate. The main three are to compete with DNPs on an even playing ground in the eyes of someone in HR who knows nothing about either profession other than highest degree , those working for the govt in any capacity as they pay partially based on highest degree, and those interested in teaching, as a doctorate is often needed for the better jobs and to get tenure. . As one of my friends with a doctorate says " Dr Jones gets his phone calls returned faster than Mr Jones".
The George Fox program follows the format I believe all PA programs will follow. Entry level masters with doctorate available with minimal additional effort and expense. A typical PA program is already over 100 units of graduate level coursework. They really just need some additional research coursework to call it a doctoral program.
"The Master of Medical Science (MMSc) is a two-year masters program (112 semester hours). In addition to the PA program, George Fox is launching a Doctor of Medical Science degree that provides advanced standing and dual enrollment for George Fox PA students. Completion of the DMSc program requires at least one additional semester of education, after PA graduation, licensure, and certification."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But my point is that if you have to jump through those hoops to be a competitive PA, and that becomes the norm, you’ve already lost the battle. Look at Utah. You guys should be thrilled that there is a path to some form of independence. But then the NPs just literally were provided with full independence. The only reason psyche NPs weren’t pulled in was because they are covered by a different set of laws for mental health practice. But regular NPs there are now set free. They don’t even need to do their first 1000 hours under the watchful eye of a physician. A Pa there needs to have 5 years of supervision... IN WHATEVER SPECIALTY THEY WANT TO PRACTICE IN! A doctorate to compete? Who is competing? OTP... all that did was get docs off the hook for liability. Under OTP, you can come work for my practice, and I, as the practice owner, would be providing the supervision, because supervision takes place at the practice level. Could PAs own their own places? Nope, that’s not what OTP is about.

The structural barriers to PAs (which are really the only things I have a problem with regarding the PA field, and it’s not all their fault) are thus...

-Cost of education (including the undergrad degree that usually doesn’t come with an income to fall back on unless you are a nurse).

-status as a dependent provider (which is only being scaled back a little bit).

-Time investment (which on the whole is tantalizingly close to what goes into undergrad and med school proper).

The time investment becomes even more of an issue with any tacked on fluff course. And yes, it would be fluff akin to what everyone says about the DNP. And the DNP has applications that appeal to practice management, and is beneficial to getting into leadership roles in health care as a whole. Every hospital has a CNO, who is an executive who moves policy. Every entity with nurses involved has a director of nursing. We are automatically invited to the party. A PA with a Dhsc is a novelty without a compelling role, especially since I know nurses with health science degrees, albeit fewer with doctorates.

Whats the difference between an NP and a PA.... NPs are more common, cheaper to obtain, most have health care experience, saavy skills from dealing with people, many more options, a great fallback (that leads to less desperation in the job search), and avenue to seamlessly advance professionally along a degree path....

I recommend PA to almost no one. Not because they aren’t competent providers, but because if these structural inequities. The time to fix them was 10 years ago. Doing it now is quite a bit late. Literally the entire western United States (and all of New England), including Hawaii and Alaska, are either independent to the full extent, or else now have minimal and easily obtainable accommodations that must be met prior to independent practice. It’s all wrapping up. PAs take one step forward, NPs take 3. That means you guys still lose ground.

And like you said... anyone can get a Dhsc. So it may become the standard for PAs, but it doesn’t set them apart. That HR person who doesn’t know what they are choosing from among will certainly know what a doctor nurse is, and it will still stand out over the PA (or MCP) with a DHSC.

Another self inflicted wound? Rebranding PAs into “Medcial Care Practitioners”, or “medical practitioners for short”, which really means you guys want to be called “MPs” to piggyback NPs in the hopes of using our title as your springboard. That’s going to obscure things for PAs even further. You can copy our name, but you can’t effectively get word out. And I can call myself a Medical Practitioner too. Patients will be like “what’s an MCP?”, and people will say “they used to be physicians’ assistants but changed their name”. The name thing would have been saavy 15 years ago, but it’s a distraction right now when PAs can’t afford it. It will be another one step forward when the NPs are still taking three.

What I’m seeing right now is a tight job market, and lower pay for non physician provides. I’m seeing NP grads waiting in the wings making $90k+ while they wait for jobs to open up, and PA grads sounding like pharmacy grads, with time ticking. Fine time to push rebranding, minimal team practice, degree creep, and flooding the market. Nurses did all this too... decades ago, when it was to our benefit.

It’s all structural, and not fair, but that’s the PA vs NP take that I have. Doctorates will be the death of PAs. Name piggybacking won’t kill the career field, but it’s the wrong moment to further obscure the profession. OTP is the wrong battle to be fighting.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I think an HR person who knows nothing will view DHSc or DMSc as equivalent degrees to DNP on the basis of the fact that they all start with D.
Yes, NPs are winning the non-physician competition for limited jobs in many places and specialties. No argument from me. The doctorate just removes one of many advantages the NPs currently have over PAs.
I don't recommend either to folks going into health care at this point. Just become a physician, because at the end of the day they are, and will remain , at the top of the dog pile. Name change is going to happen. It will be MCP or Physician Associate. I am fine with either. None of the other options have support or make sense. The "assistant" in our name has been hurting us since the inception of the profession. It has to go. Incremental improvements in practice laws have been helping, like removing physician liability for PA actions and increasing the # of PAs a doc can work with. At my current job we were maxed out at 5 PAs. Our new law passed, allowing 10, and we hired more PAs. Previously we had been hiring FP docs for more money who could do less than the experienced EM PAs. It is probably hard to see from the outside looking in, but little changes do add up over time. Yes, we are 20 years behind the NPs. I have at least 20 years left in my career I think. By the time I retire I believe PAs and NPs will be 100% interchangeable in the vast majority of settings with full independence, etc. CA and TX will take a while, but all the rural states will jump on board now that N Dakota, MI, UT, NM, etc have started the ball rolling. Pretty much EVERY state has an OTP bill on the legislative agenda this term. Many will pass. Many will not. baby steps.
 
I think an HR person who knows nothing will view DHSc or DMSc as equivalent degrees to DNP on the basis of the fact that they all start with D.
Yes, NPs are winning the non-physician competition for limited jobs in many places and specialties. No argument from me. The doctorate just removes one of many advantages the NPs currently have over PAs.
I don't recommend either to folks going into health care at this point. Just become a physician, because at the end of the day they are, and will remain , at the top of the dog pile. Name change is going to happen. It will be MCP or Physician Associate. I am fine with either. None of the other options have support or make sense. The "assistant" in our name has been hurting us since the inception of the profession. It has to go. Incremental improvements in practice laws have been helping, like removing physician liability for PA actions and increasing the # of PAs a doc can work with. At my current job we were maxed out at 5 PAs. Our new law passed, allowing 10, and we hired more PAs. Previously we had been hiring FP docs for more money who could do less than the experienced EM PAs. It is probably hard to see from the outside looking in, but little changes do add up over time. Yes, we are 20 years behind the NPs. I have at least 20 years left in my career I think. By the time I retire I believe PAs and NPs will be 100% interchangeable in the vast majority of settings with full independence, etc. CA and TX will take a while, but all the rural states will jump on board now that N Dakota, MI, UT, NM, etc have started the ball rolling. Pretty much EVERY state has an OTP bill on the legislative agenda this term. Many will pass. Many will not. baby steps.
I knew a doctor that said that in 10 years, PAs would be making $75k, and being able to hire 10 of them vs 5 will help lead to that. The issue is that independence wasn’t part of the deal, just expansion. OTP also took responsibility away from the individual doctor to supervise, and handed it to the practice. So where before you had a natural ally, now you have a bunch of folks who just saw you guys expand at their expense. Don’t think they didn’t notice. And a house full of PAs is going to see salary drop. I see that doctors prophecy coming true. That’s what I mean by fighting the working battle at the wrong time. You guys lowered your wage before you gained independence. Independence is the battle that wins all the other ones. Nothing else matters if you don’t have that. Nurses always knew that. The profession is dead, you guys just don’t know it.

Nursing had independence before they had any saturation, and after that, saturation worked in our favor because it brought influence. Keep in mind that NP saturation isn’t as detrimental to us as it will be for PAs to be in saturated markets.

We owned our name before being a nurse was cool, and we built the brand into the most trusted profession in America.

But no... OTP was a move made out of weakness to get stealth independence. What PAs needed was boldness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We added PAs and we all got a raise. Why? Experienced EM PAs still make less than inexperienced FP docs by about $20/hr and about 1/2 what a residency trained and boarded EM doc makes.
PA was also named the best job in America AND best health care job this year: PA Named Best Overall Job in 2021 by U.S. News & World Report
NP was #2
Physician was #3

We aren't going away. There are too many of us now and we are gaining ground every year. Slow and steady. baby steps. We will get there.
Update: Virginia just passed legislation stating physicians not liable for PA errors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top