2019-2020 UC San Francisco

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
How encouraged should I be that I just got a secondary? My stats are pretty far below their average. 513 MCAT, 3.72 cGPA, 3.63 sGPA although very strong upward trend after freshman year. My activities are fairly unique and I think my PS stands out a lot. I know they prescreen pretty heavily, so does the fact that I just got a secondary mean I actually have a shot, or is do most applicants get one?
 
How encouraged should I be that I just got a secondary? My stats are pretty far below their average. 513 MCAT, 3.72 cGPA, 3.63 sGPA although very strong upward trend after freshman year. My activities are fairly unique and I think my PS stands out a lot. I know they prescreen pretty heavily, so does the fact that I just got a secondary mean I actually have a shot, or is do most applicants get one?

Like you said they screen pretty heavily. So the fact they sent you a secondary says that they like something about your app. If I remember correctly, only about a third gets a secondary so your chance is good. I’d say submit the secondary. When were you verified?
 
Like you said they screen pretty heavily. So the fact they sent you a secondary says that they like something about your app. If I remember correctly, only about a third gets a secondary so your chance is good. I’d say submit the secondary. When were you verified?

Verified on 7/19
 
Still haven’t gotten a secondary. Verified 7/17. Am I screwed? I have an II at another school. Given that I’m assuming I would at least make the secondary cut here?

I was verified on 6/20 before primaries were sent to schools and got my secondary on 8/5. I am LizzyM 67 so way below their average. Willing to bet I failed an auto screen of sorts but got rescued by a manual screener
 
Btw, if anyone was wondering, I didn’t write any of the secondary essay(s) and it worked out. Don’t feel like just because they don’t have required questions, that means you have to put something in the optional section. N=1 of course
 
What did you mean by this?
Perhaps that their application didn't make it through the initial automatic/algorithm based screen. It's possible that their application was then manually reviewed by an admissions committee member who was able to override the algorithm based screen.
 
What did you mean by this?

Yes I meant what developer said. I really didn’t think they were going to send me a secondary, and my friends who applied long after me had already received theirs. I had already written them off when it arrived in my inbox

Edit: clarity
 
Received my secondary yesterday and was verified 7/20 I think. Just submitted it. I applied for the regular MD track but my personal statement focused on serving the urban underserved. Do you guys think they will question why I didnt apply to Prime? I dont want to do 5 years/get a masters and I still feel like I can do what I want with the standard track. I didn't include an explanation of this anywhere on my app because it wasn't relevant to the secondary question at all and they had no space to add additional info. Thoughts?
 
I don’t think they’ll question it. If they do, you’ve got a solid answer. I think they know that prime isn’t for everyone. Congrats on getting your secondary! That’s a big deal! It gives me I may still get mine!
 
Still no secondary...verified in June, 67 LM score and OOS, but no rejection so I'm still holding out hope!
Same here! Similar LM also verified in June, but IS. I have a ton of connections to this school so I was really hoping for a secondary even though it was a total dream reach anyways
 
Do we know if PRIME applicants are on a slower timeline than normal MD, like UCLA?
 
Looking back, I think I should have added this school. Secondaries aren’t too bad and it’s one of my state schools. Didn’t want to just donate, but I think someone with an LM 67 got a secondary? Think my ECs would help, but my MCAT is beyond their 10th whereas my GPA is in their 10th,

Is it too late to add to school to my list?
 
Last edited:
Looking back, I think I should have added this school. Secondaries aren’t too bad and it’s one of my state schools. Didn’t want to just donate, but I think someone with an LM 67 got a secondary? Think my ECs would help, but my MCAT is beyond their 10th whereas my GPA is in their 10th,

Is it too late to add to school to my list?

If money isn’t an issue, you could still send your primary. Shoot your shot lol. I don’t think it’s too late in the process and they are still sending secondaries out. If you do get one, it might take a while to get it though since I think they review apps in chronological order of complete date.
 
If money isn’t an issue, you could still send your primary. Shoot your shot lol. I don’t think it’s too late in the process and they are still sending secondaries out. If you do get one, it might take a while to get it though since I think they review apps in chronological order of complete date.

Thank you! Shot my shot haha.
 
A mild tangent but humor me. UCLA interviews 330 in state from about 6000 and UCSF interviews about 260 in state from about 4500. Assuming the subset applying to UCSF is essentially from the UCLA applicant pool, is there substantial overlap between these 2 interview pools? Or are the schools looking for completely different things?

Just curious on yall's thoughts. Not expecting to obtain any concrete answers.
 
A mild tangent but humor me. UCLA interviews 330 in state from about 6000 and UCSF interviews about 260 in state from about 4500. Assuming the subset applying to UCSF is essentially from the UCLA applicant pool, is there substantial overlap between these 2 interview pools? Or are the schools looking for completely different things?

Just curious on yall's thoughts. Not expecting to obtain any concrete answers.
Hard to know for sure but I would suspect there is a large degree of overlap.
 
So there’s ~20% chance we might get an II? I like the sound of that.

It is worth noting that according to MSAR post interview matriculation rates are surprisingly very good for instate applicants. 261 instate interviews led to 130 instate matriculants. On the other hand, for OOS applicants, 215 interviews resulted in 35 matriculants. Another thing I find interesting is that there could be up to 50 acceptances given to applicants who were waitlisted (which could explain why there are so few OOS matriculants because OOS tuition is steep).
 
It is worth noting that according to MSAR post interview matriculation rates are surprisingly very good for instate applicants. 261 instate interviews led to 130 instate matriculants. On the other hand, for OOS applicants, 215 interviews resulted in 35 matriculants. Another thing I find interesting is that there could be up to 50 acceptances given to applicants who were waitlisted (which could explain why there are so few OOS matriculants because OOS tuition is steep).
US World News says that for OOS applicants, the 205 interviews turned into 108 acceptances (which then became 34 matriculants). There were 152 IS acceptances, so the yield is definitely much higher for IS students.

Coupled with the differing tuition costs, I feel like the OOS lower matriculation rate is likely because IS students likely want to stay in California, whereas out of state students may have received acceptances at other similarly ranked schools in other areas of the country.
 
Top