Will Leaving California Benefit Me, Or Will Adcoms See Through It?

[Python Forever]

I'm a 23-year old ORM in California (graduated 2 months ago), and I'm looking to start a career change/transcript repair post-bacc in a few months after working for ~6 months. From what I read, it seems clear a CA ORM with relatively low stats = kiss of death.

I had dinner with my mom last night, and she mentioned she's thinking of moving out of state to a midwestern state for CoL and change of scenery. I mentioned my CA woes, and she simply asked me why don't I move with her.

This got me thinking, say I moved to another state 1 year before applying, worked/paid taxes (I'd live with my mom to drastically reduce CoL and split the rent; shouldn't be an issue right?), and declared residency right before early-mid June. Would this abrupt change in residency actually benefit me, or would the state schools' adcoms see right through it (i.e. "oh, it looks like this guy just moved 1 year before applying to take advantage of our state")?

Any advice on whether to move/how to do so would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

It's not as simple as that. You need to go to the school's website and find out exactly what residency requirements are.

Some States are on to this and some of them are more strict than others as to what is considered residency.

 

[deleted962973]

From personal experience, you can live in Ohio for a single year and qualify for IS tuition at Ohio State, which is an amazing school. Very low cost of living in Ohio too, and in my opinion, it’s a lot more interesting than a lot of other midwestern states (looking at you Nebraska/Missouri/Dakotas). You could potentially do something like a research gap year working at one of the big med schools such as OSU or Case while also taking classes.

 

[ThrowawayShmoaway]

All you need is 1 year for Texas, too

 

[Mooseforkicks]

Research by each state and school. It’s doable— many states require one year of residency to be considered IS. However, some put restrictions for qualifying for IS if you are also taking any college classes during that 1 year.

As far as adcoms “seeing through it,” I think it depends on the narrative. To me, an explanation about moving to be near a close family member seems reasonable.

I know of 2 non-trads who moved from CA a year before their application cycle specifically for a better chance at admission (though they both went to TX).

 

[Walter Raleigh]

I wonder if two birds could be killed with one stone: perhaps someone seeking to change residency might do something like Americorps in a state outside of CA, and thus establish residence there. It's not a viable solution for OP, but it might work for someone else.

 

[Isoval]

All you need is 1 year for Texas, too

The only problem is that Texas residency generally precludes you from AMCAS schools unless you’re a rockstar applicant.

...but there are ten schools on TMDSAS and they’re all great.

 

[Obnoxious Dad]

I'm a 23-year old ORM in California (graduated 2 months ago), and I'm looking to start a career change/transcript repair post-bacc in a few months after working for ~6 months. From what I read, it seems clear a CA ORM with relatively low stats = kiss of death.

I had dinner with my mom last night, and she mentioned she's thinking of moving out of state to a midwestern state for CoL and change of scenery. I mentioned my CA woes, and she simply asked me why don't I move with her.

This got me thinking, say I moved to another state 1 year before applying, worked/paid taxes (I'd live with my mom to drastically reduce CoL and split the rent; shouldn't be an issue right?), and declared residency right before early-mid June. Would this abrupt change in residency actually benefit me, or would the state schools' adcoms see right through it (i.e. "oh, it looks like this guy just moved 1 year before applying to take advantage of our state")?

Any advice on whether to move/how to do so would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

I wouldn't move down south if I were you. Ohio is a good choice because the state has six state owned medical schools including the DO school in Athens.

 

[ThrowawayShmoaway]

The only problem is that Texas residency generally precludes you from AMCAS schools unless you’re a rockstar applicant.

...but there are ten schools on TMDSAS and they’re all great.

It does if you’ve attended high school and college in Texas (you’re less likely to leave for med school.) But for somebody who’s just moved there a year ago, their high school and college listed on AMCAS will presumably not be in Texas, so there may not be that “bias” against Texas from OOS school.

 

[gyngyn]

It does if you’ve attended high school and college in Texas (you’re less likely to leave for med school.) But for somebody who’s just moved there a year ago, their high school and college listed on AMCAS will presumably not be in Texas, so there may not be that “bias” against Texas from OOS school.

Screeners may not dig that deeply.

 

[Python Forever]

One of my parents are moving to Houston, Texas this summer, and asked me if I wanted to come move with her. I'm currently a CA ORM in need of career change/reinventor. If I maintain my current academic track, I would have a 3.3 cGPA and 3.4 sGPA with ~85 post-bacc units (prerequisites and other science classes). I've been averaging 520+ on MCAT practice exams and AAMC FL's. IDK how good of a predictor that is.

Texas residency requirements are: 1 year living in the state (consecutive months), and working 20+ hours/week ("gainful employment"), which I can meet while living with one of my parents.

My question is, would the trouble of moving from CA to TX be worth it? I graduated high school in NY, and did my undergrad + 3 years of working/additional schooling in California. I would be living in Texas for about 2 years prior to applying.

I've read that very few Texan residents matriculate OOS. Would this apply to me as well? Since I'm a reinventor, I plan to apply to quite a number of schools outside of Texas that reward reinvention. Would a recent TX residency get in the way of doing that?

Outside of med school planning, Texas also has a much lower CoL, which is attractive as well.

From a purely medical school standpoint, does it look like a CA -> TX move would be worth it for my situation, or is the hassle not worth it, i.e. no significant increase in acceptance chance?

 

[DoctorSnow]

From personal experience, you can live in Ohio for a single year and qualify for IS tuition at Ohio State, which is an amazing school. Very low cost of living in Ohio too, and in my opinion, it’s a lot more interesting than a lot of other midwestern states (looking at you Nebraska/Missouri/Dakotas). You could potentially do something like a research gap year working at one of the big med schools such as OSU or Case while also taking classes.

Some of the Dakota schools even have preferences within their state. Being originally from MN, they showed bias to students who grew up in the state instead of moving to the state recently. Just make sure you research each school on their preferences. I'd move to a lucky state like Texas.

Also, can confirm that Dakotas are uninteresting, cold wastelands.

 

[gyngyn]

From a purely medical school standpoint, does it look like a CA -> TX move would be worth it for my situation, or is the hassle not worth it, i.e. no significant increase in acceptance chance?

Last year, only 16.7% of CA applicants got to stay in CA, 24.7 went OOS. The mean MCAT for a successful Californian was 513.4.
31.9% of TX applicants got to stay in TX and their mean MCAT was 510.7. The downside of hoping to apply outside of TX is that only 259 individuals matriculated OOS (5.7%)!

 

[neurosurgeon_wannabe]

The downside of hoping to apply outside of TX is that only 259 individuals matriculated OOS (5.7%)!

Do we have any numbers on the amount of TX applicants that interview OOS? (and/or get accepted OOS?)
Anecdotally, I'm from TX and will be matriculating OOS, and on the interview trail I definitely met other Texans interviewing OOS. I do get that, all things being equal, Adcoms may choose non-Texans to interview/accept due to yield concerns, but do you think the super low percentage of OOS TX matriculants might slightly overstate the OOS "bias" against TX? Since we don't actually know how many applied OOS (or do we?), and how many of those applicants actually got interviewed/accepted?

 

[Python Forever]

Last year, only 16.7% of CA applicants got to stay in CA, 24.7 went OOS. The mean MCAT for a successful Californian was 513.4.
31.9% of TX applicants got to stay in TX and their mean MCAT was 510.7. The downside of hoping to apply outside of TX is that only 259 individuals matriculated OOS (5.7%)!

I guess as a traditional applicant, TX definitely has a leg-up on CA. But how would this change for a reinventor? My cGPA and sGPA are pretty much locked in at 3.3x and 3.4x with about 85 post-bacc units (2.7 -> 4.0; total 3.3x). I wouldve amassed about 1.5k and 1k clinical/non-clinical hours in 2 years. Little to no research, although that might change.

So, the only variable thing is my MCAT. If a successful MCAT for a TX resident is 510.7, and I score above that going off with my practice scores, does that make a difference big enough to rely on TMDSAS?

If TX schools reward reinvention, then it may be worth it to make the move, but if not, then I would have to rely on just 10ish TX schools, and can’t rely on OOS applications (by applying to a lot of schools).

I need to make a decision in about 2-3 months, so any input and advice would be greatly appreciated.

@gyngyn @Goro

 

[enalli]

Maybe I'm too far removed from the process, but I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here--moving states just to get a leg up on admissions? What?

You are about to go back to being a student before embarking on a 4+-year long debt adventure. If you can stomach living with your folks for a while, then moving with them is actually a smart financial decision.

Since the discussion has now moved to California vs. Texas and "Texas bias", I will say this: Californians are obnoxious. They spend 50% of the time talking about how much better Mexican food, Asian food, and fast food burgers are in their state; and they spend the other 50% of the time directly ****ting on whichever state they are embarrassed to currently live in. Everyone in medicine knows that a Californian's singular goal in life is to return to California and eat In-N-Out everyday. If admissions committees are ok letting Californians into their schools, then they sure as hell are happy to take Texans in. Probably the reason why fewer Texans leave for med school is that a lot just don't apply (having a separate application system will do that). There are way too many Texans in this country for med schools to discount them completely--it would be silly to do so.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Maybe I'm too far removed from the process, but I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here--moving states just to get a leg up on admissions? What?

There are states where it is a huge disadvantage to be from wrt to medical school admissions. If you can swing it, it makes sense to go to a favorable state.

 

[ThrowawayShmoaway]

Since the discussion has now moved to California vs. Texas and "Texas bias", I will say this: Californians are obnoxious. They spend 50% of the time talking about how much better Mexican food, Asian food, and fast food burgers are in their state; and they spend the other 50% of the time directly ****ting on whichever state they are embarrassed to currently live in. Everyone in medicine knows that a Californian's singular goal in life is to return to California and eat In-N-Out everyday. If admissions committees are ok letting Californians into their schools, then they sure as hell are happy to take Texans in

Lol, I’m pretty sure none of us were using “bias” in the sense of whether people “like” Texans and/or Californians
The “bias” we’re referring to is whether OOS schools will use resources to interview on TX applicants since they know those applicants have a lot of cheaper options in-state and are more likely to matriculate there anyways.

 

[enalli]

Lol, I’m pretty sure none of us were using “bias” in the sense of whether people “like” Texans and/or Californians
The “bias” we’re referring to is whether OOS schools will use resources to interview on TX applicants since they know those applicants have a lot of cheaper options in-state and are more likely to matriculate there anyways.

Yes, I understood the bias point. What I'm saying is that OOS schools also know that, given a choice, Californians will stay in California. Californians are no different in that sense from Texans--probably worse, in fact (that was the entire point of my over-the-top California rant).

 

[Goro]

Yes, I understood the bias point. What I'm saying is that OOS schools also know that, given a choice, Californians will stay in California. Californians are no different in that sense from Texans--probably worse, in fact (that was the entire point of my over-the-top California rant).

Well, Texans want to stay IS for that nice IS tuition.

Californians want to stay in CA because it's well, CA. My own school gets a fair share of Golden Staters who are MD caliber simply because we're on their side of the Missouri River.

 

[gyngyn]

If admissions committees are ok letting Californians into their schools, then they sure as hell are happy to take Texans in. Probably the reason why fewer Texans leave for med school is that a lot just don't apply (having a separate application system will do that). There are way too many Texans in this country for med schools to discount them completely--it would be silly to do so.

Interviews are expensive. When we see how low the odds are of a TX applicant leaving TX, we need to be able to offer an incentive. An amazing TX applicant can absolutely expect OOS interviews, otherwise, those of us who can read stats will pass them over for those more likely to attend (without an "incentive").

 

[gyngyn]

I need to make a decision in about 2-3 months, so any input and advice would be greatly appreciated.

@gyngyn @Goro

The only other independent variable regarding TX is their disproportionate regard for GPA. Whether they will pay more attention to your more recent grades is hard to tell.

 

[jarednogeek]

come to Texas man, you'll love it here.

 

[jarednogeek]

Also I applied in Texas and interviewed at every MD in the state. applied to 10ish mid tier schools OOS and didn't receive a single II. If you come to Texas odds are you'll stay here for MD.

 

[Lardy Boy]

After an unsuccessfully cycle as a California applicant, I moved back to the state I was born in. Lizzy M ~70. Soon I’ll know if it was worth it or not.

 

[Med Ed]

Yes, I understood the bias point. What I'm saying is that OOS schools also know that, given a choice, Californians will stay in California.

Texas: population 28.3 million

Texas medical schools that give preference to in-state students (at least 90% by law, except Baylor, which has 85% in-state students):

Baylor - 185 first year seats
McGovern - 241
Texas A&M - 164
Texas Tech El Paso - 103
Texas Tech Lubbock - 180
UT San Antonio - 209
UT Austin - 50
UT Galveston - 230
UT Rio Grande - 50

Total - 1,412, of which at leasts 1,261 are earmarked for Texas residents

California: population 39.5 million

California medical schools that give preference to in-state students:

UC Davis -114 first year seats
UC Irvine - 104
UCLA - 175
UC Riverside - 66
UCSD - 134
UCSF - 161

Total - 754, of which 614 were filled by California residents in the last MSAR

The quickest summary is this: compared to Texas, California has 40% more people and half the public medical school seats available to applicants. Texas schools are also much cheaper. Taken together, this is why most California applicants leave the state while most Texas applicants stay put.

 

[Ad2b]

Texas: population 28.3 million

Total - 1,412, of which at leasts 1,261 are earmarked for Texas residents

Total - 754, of which 614 were filled by California residents in the last MSAR

or another way to look at it:
Texas IS matriculants = 89%
CA IS matriculants = 81%

Who'd have thought? I figured the CA IS would be much higher

Though the percentages would/might lead one to think better chance in CA, the reality is, more people applying vs. Texas

 

[Med Ed]

or another way to look at it:
Texas IS matriculants = 89%
CA IS matriculants = 81%

Who'd have thought? I figured the CA IS would be much higher

It used to be, just like UC tuition used to be $0, but times have changed, and so has the financial calculus.

 

[deleted804295]

I wish I lived in Texas. Warm weather, Southern hospitality, good food, and great for small businesses. If you can move to Texas you should do it!

 

[Ad2b]

@Sunbodi rattlesnakes ...

 

[Goro]

The only other independent variable regarding TX is their disproportionate regard for GPA. Whether they will pay more attention to your more recent grades is hard to tell.

UTSA seems to reward reinvention.

 

[ElNino69]

It will benefit you as a person.

 

[Toutie]

Maybe I'm too far removed from the process, but I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here--moving states just to get a leg up on admissions? What?

You are about to go back to being a student before embarking on a 4+-year long debt adventure. If you can stomach living with your folks for a while, then moving with them is actually a smart financial decision.

Since the discussion has now moved to California vs. Texas and "Texas bias", I will say this: Californians are obnoxious. They spend 50% of the time talking about how much better Mexican food, Asian food, and fast food burgers are in their state; and they spend the other 50% of the time directly ****ting on whichever state they are embarrassed to currently live in. Everyone in medicine knows that a Californian's singular goal in life is to return to California and eat In-N-Out everyday. If admissions committees are ok letting Californians into their schools, then they sure as hell are happy to take Texans in. Probably the reason why fewer Texans leave for med school is that a lot just don't apply (having a separate application system will do that). There are way too many Texans in this country for med schools to discount them completely--it would be silly to do so.

BUT...the Mexican food is much better in California. Says this obnoxious former Californian.

 

[Ad2b]

BUT...the Mexican food is much better in California. Says this obnoxious former Californian.

pfft, I'll raise your CA Mexican food and throw down FL for both Mexican AND Cuban

 

[enalli]

Interviews are expensive. When we see how low the odds are of a TX applicant leaving TX, we need to be able to offer an incentive. An amazing TX applicant can absolutely expect OOS interviews, otherwise, those of us who can read stats will pass them over for those more likely to attend (without an "incentive").

You are in the admissions committee so I won't pretend to know more than you, but how much do you think this is a self-fulfilling prophecy? By your own account, you don't even bother to interview most Texans, so you are contributing to those same numbers you are citing, as you don't even give Texans the option to matriculate out of state.

I would venture to say that a Californian wants to stay in California just as much (if not more) than a Texan wants to stay in Texas and it is just disheartening to read that Californians get the benefit of the doubt but Texans don't.

Maybe I just suck at reading stats, but the data you are quoting seems to be missing a critical variable given the existence of TMDSAS: what are the odds that a Texan *applying out of state* (or even better, is accepted out of state) will go out of state . It seems odd to lump the many students who only submit TMDSAS when considering if someone will leave the state.

 

[gyngyn]

You are in the admissions committee so I won't pretend to know more than you, but how much do you think this is a self-fulfilling prophecy? By your own account, you don't even bother to interview most Texans, so you are contributing to those same numbers you are citing, as you don't even give Texans the option to matriculate out of state.

I would venture to say that a Californian wants to stay in California just as much (if not more) than a Texan wants to stay in Texas and it is just disheartening to read that Californians get the benefit of the doubt but Texans don't.

Maybe I just suck at reading stats, but the data you are quoting seems to be missing a critical variable given the existence of TMDSAS: what are the odds that a Texan *applying out of state* (or even better, is accepted out of state) will go out of state . It seems odd to lump the many students who submit TMDSAS only when considering if someone will leave the state.

The state of TX has done everything possible to keep TX applicants in TX. There's nothing wrong with that.
They accomplished this by seceding from the union in the form of TDMSAS, the requirement that IS schools matriculate at least 90%, the development of new schools and other more subtle incentives and disincentives.
The prophecy is one designed by the state of TX. In that way it is self-fulfilling!

If you were an admissions officer who sees that more CA applicants leave CA than stay (vs a tiny number of TX applicants) who would you be more likely to interview (all else being equal)? None of this requires that we consider the preference of IS applicants. Just an observation of the facts. I'm pretty sure that most of the 259 Texans who matriculated OOS received a hefty inducement to do so. There is nothing wrong with that, but the average good applicant is not likely to get an interview from an OOS admissions officer who can read an AAMC Table (namely Table A-5).

 

[Med Ed]

BUT...the Mexican food is much better in California. Says this obnoxious former Californian.

Of course it is. There is no Mexican food in Texas. It's all Tex-Mex.

 

[enalli]

If you were an admissions officer who sees that more CA applicants leave CA than stay (vs a tiny number of TX applicants) who would you be more likely to interview (all else being equal)? None of this requires that we consider the preference of IS applicants. Just an observation of the facts. I'm pretty sure that most of the 259 Texans who matriculated OOS received a hefty inducement to do so. There is nothing wrong with that, but the average good applicant is not likely to get an interview from an OOS admissions officer who can read an AAMC Table (namely Table A-5).

That's an interesting data set. Here is the relevant data for CA and TX in-state matriculants (IS), out-of-state matriculants (OOS), and students not matriculated (R):

CA: 16.7% IS; 24.7% OOS; 58.6% R
TX: 31.9% IS; 5.7% OOS; 62.4% R

It seems 41.4% of Californians get into medical school, while 37.6% of Texans do. It seems interesting that even with all the incentives you mention, Californians still get into medical school at a higher rate than Texans, which is the opposite of what all the earlier posts would have me believe. Is this all accounted by the difference in MCAT scores, is this all statistical noise, or is this the effect of the "Texas Bias"? In any case, if I'm one of the 62.4% of Texans who is looking at not becoming a doctor, I would say an acceptance in and of itself is inducement enough to make me go out of state.

 

[Naruhodo]

I'd just say to make sure you remember to change *everything* to your new state. Driver's license, car registration, voter's registration, taxes, etc. Basically, it you give a state school any reason to charge you OOS tuition, they probably will.

Also, this is more likely to work for some states than for other's. In Utah for example this would be a hard sell (students had to prove using bank records, plane tickets, etc that they had not spent more than 2 weeks out of state in the previous year).

 

[Med Ed]

That's an interesting data set. Here is the relevant data for CA and TX in-state matriculants (IS), out-of-state matriculants (OOS), and students not matriculated (R):

CA: 16.7% IS; 24.7% OOS; 58.6% R
TX: 31.9% IS; 5.7% OOS; 62.4% R

It seems 41.4% of Californians get into medical school, while 37.6% of Texans do. It seems interesting that even with all the incentives you mention, Californians still get into medical school at a higher rate than Texans, which is the opposite of what all the earlier posts would have me believe. Is this all accounted by the difference in MCAT scores, is this all statistical noise, or is this the effect of the "Texas Bias"? In any case, if I'm one of the 62.4% of Texans who is looking at not becoming a doctor, I would say an acceptance in and of itself is inducement enough to make me go out of state.

To add to this, 85% of Texas matriculants are in-state, versus 40% of California matriculants. It would be interesting to compare the metrics of the unsuccessful applicant pools from each state.

Sorry, what was your question again?

 

[gyngyn]

That's an interesting data set. Here is the relevant data for CA and TX in-state matriculants (IS), out-of-state matriculants (OOS), and students not matriculated (R):

CA: 16.7% IS; 24.7% OOS; 58.6% R
TX: 31.9% IS; 5.7% OOS; 62.4% R

It seems 41.4% of Californians get into medical school, while 37.6% of Texans do. It seems interesting that even with all the incentives you mention, Californians still get into medical school at a higher rate than Texans, which is the opposite of what all the earlier posts would have me believe. Is this all accounted by the difference in MCAT scores, is this all statistical noise, or is this the effect of the "Texas Bias"? In any case, if I'm one of the 62.4% of Texans who is looking at not becoming a doctor, I would say an acceptance in and of itself is inducement enough to make me go out of state.

CA has a large number of amazing applicants!

 

[DrFortiusNatando]

CA has a large number of amazing applicants!

The Top20 undergrad schools, even on the east coast, are full of Californians, but definitely fewer Texans. If more top student Texans are staying in state for college, this may be hurting them in their hopes when they apply OOS for medical school. Medical schools may assume that a born and bred Texan, who stayed IS for UG, is not likely to leave the great state of Tx, compared to a CA resident who already fled the nest and went to Harvard, Yale, Penn, Princeton, Columbia, MIT, Duke, Brown, Hopkins etc.

Part of this may also be that the primary and secondary schools, on average, are better in CA than Texas. Participation-adjusted SAT/ACT scores are higher in CA than Texas.

Average SAT & ACT Scores by State (Participation Adjusted)
(I note that I have lived in 3 of the top 4 states...I am a big believer that investment in the public school systems does pay off!)

There are of course, some very good Texas school systems and some very top students from Texas. But CA just does it slightly better, esp when it comes to launching more of their students to the bigger name UG's. And In and Out Burger is pretty darn good! I have family in Texas and love to visit, but no IN and OUT there!

 

[Goro]

Of course it is. There is no Mexican food in Texas. It's all Tex-Mex.

I have found that Tex-Mex >>> Cali-Mex.

 

[Toutie]

I have found that Tex-Mex >>> Cali-Mex.

 

[LadyGlen]

I have found that Tex-Mex >>> Cali-Mex.

Blasphemy!