France has eleven Institutes of Political Studies, but not all of them operate in the same category. With a budget exceeding two hundred million euros for one and envelopes ten to fifteen times smaller for others, the IEPs form a network that is much more heterogeneous than usual rankings suggest. The year 2025 confirms certain trends and reveals others, particularly regarding selectivity and disparities in resources.
Budget and tuition fees of IEPs: a structural fracture rarely exposed
Rankings often compare selectivity rates or salaries upon graduation. They pay less attention to what partly conditions these results: the financial resources available to each institution.
The Challenges 2026 ranking quantifies the gap. Sciences Po Paris operates with a budget of around 238 million euros and charges a maximum annual cost in bachelor programs of about 14,720 euros. A regional IEP like Lyon has a budget of around 14.5 million euros, with fees close to 6,170 euros per year.
The ratio is one to sixteen regarding budgets. This imbalance translates concretely: number of permanent professors, size of research teams, ability to finance international partnerships, internal scholarships. Analyzing the ranking of IEPs in France without considering this data amounts to comparing institutions that do not operate with the same resources.
The average salary six months after graduation partly reflects this gap: around 42,439 euros for Paris, compared to about 33,000 euros for Lyon. The available data does not allow us to conclude that only the budget explains this difference (location, alumni network, specializations come into play), but the correlation remains striking.
Selectivity of the common IEP exam in 2025: Lille and Saint-Germain-en-Laye lurking
Selectivity is the most scrutinized criterion by candidates on Parcoursup. In 2025, the common exam of regional IEPs confirmed the rise of two institutions that are gaining ground on the more established ones.
Sciences Po Lille has one of the lowest selectivity rates in the network, around 4.7% according to Cours Thalès data. The IEP of Saint-Germain-en-Laye is also significantly improving in attractiveness. These two campuses are beginning to attract profiles that, a few years ago, would have exclusively targeted Paris or selective bachelor’s programs.
This evolution raises a concrete question for future candidates: does the selectivity of an IEP reflect the quality of the education, or simply the geographical attractiveness and perceived reputation? Field feedback diverges on this point. A highly selective IEP does not necessarily offer better job prospects than a less sought-after campus with specialized programs.
Distribution of neo-bac and bac+1 in the common exam
A notable fact from the 2025 session: the distribution between neo-bac (final year) candidates and bac+1 (first year of higher education) is almost balanced. This means that the common exam attracts as many fresh graduates as reorientations, a sign of an attractiveness that goes beyond just the pool of final year students.
Sciences Po Paris vs. regional IEPs: two distinct training models
Contrasting Paris with the rest of the network would be reductive, but the differences in models deserve to be clearly stated.
- Sciences Po Paris recruits through its own procedure (outside the common exam), with an assumed international positioning and fees adjusted according to family income, which can reach the highest ceiling in the network.
- Regional IEPs pool part of their recruitment through the common exam, offer significantly lower tuition fees, and develop specific territorial anchors (Europe in Strasbourg, Arab world in Aix, environment in Rennes).
- The curriculum lasts five years in all cases and leads to a master’s degree, but the specializations in the fourth and fifth years vary significantly from one campus to another.
However, one common point persists: all IEPs require a year of international mobility, which remains a strong marker of the education compared to traditional universities.
Limits of IEP rankings: what the rankings do not measure
The rankings published each year (Challenges, L’Étudiant, Le Figaro) are based on quantifiable criteria: selectivity, salary upon graduation, employment rate, budget, international openness. These indicators are useful, but they leave blind spots.
The quality of pedagogical supervision, for example, does not appear in any ranking directly. The ratio of teachers-researchers to students, the diversity of specialization seminars, access to internships in local public institutions: all these elements weigh in the real experience of a student without appearing in comparative tables.
An IEP well-ranked on selectivity may disappoint in individual support, and vice versa. Rankings guide the choice, they do not make it.
The landscape of IEPs in 2025 confirms a two-speed reality: a Parisian institution with resources unmatched by the rest of the network, and regional IEPs that compensate with targeted specializations and increasing selectivity. For a candidate, the choice is not limited to a position in a table. It depends on the professional project, family budget, and the specialization aimed for in the master’s program.