I've taken the liberty of conducting my own survey: The REAL Pluralist Guide to Graduate Programs in Philosophy (RPG). What follows are the results.
First, some important details. You're on a need-to-know basis regarding procedures and methodology and other crucial features of the survey (and I'm making it all up as I go along). By my lights, you don't need to know anything, so don't bother asking. If need be, I'll write a few non-responsive blog posts in reaction to your questions. The identities, response-rates, qualifications, and such of my experts is also none of your concern. But let me emphasize once again that they're experts. For reals.
American Philosophy: Pittsburgh; Columbia; Rutgers; Miami
Continental Philosophy: Chicago; Northwestern; NYU; Brown
Philosophy of Race: Princeton; Harvard; Michigan (Ann Arbor); Chicago
Feminist Philosophy: MIT; Stanford; Colorado (Boulder)
GLBT Studies: At present, there is no especially good Philosophy department in this area.
Climate for Women: Actually consult persons with actual experience of the program; that anyone from outside a department would take himself or herself to be in a position to comment on this is completely absurd.
What's this pluralism all about, then? If you're interested in specializing in an area of Philosophy that is (for better or worse) considered outside of the mainstream of the discipline, you would do well to study at a program that is very strong overall in the mainstream areas while also being (1) welcoming of your interests, and (2) home to someone who does excellent work in the area of your interest. Providing students with a strong foundation in the state of the art in mainstream Philosophy while also welcoming excellent work in other areas-- that's pluralism. Departments that focus lopsidedly on any area, even self-appointed "pluralist" areas like American and Continental, are not pluralistic. Good pluralist departments do not advertise themselves as such. Beware.
I'm interested in one of the areas ranked above, but didn't get into any of the programs the Guide identifies as best. What should I do? Naturally, the best places to study topics like the ones ranked above are also places that are very strong overall, and so admission to these programs is highly competitive. If you don't get into one of these schools, consider your priorities and your career goals. Ask yourself some questions: Do you want a job after working extremely hard for 6 or 7 years on a PhD? What kind of job do you want? Does it make sense to work on your application and reapply next year? What's so great about getting a PhD in Philosophy, anyway? Can you stomach working on (writing a dissertation on) some more mainstream topic, while cultivating your expertise in other areas on your own? But the bottom line is this: If you decide to go to any other program to work on the topic you're most interested in, gather as much information as possible, visit the department, and ask a lot of questions.
What about the Leiter Report (PGR) and that other "Pluralist's Guide"? When used according to the guidelines provided again and again on its webpage, the PGR is an excellent source of information about the reputation of the faculty at various departments. It's also a good way to get a sense of which philosophers are at which departments, and of what the strengths of various departments are. It is by itself not a good instrument for making final decisions about what department is best for you. But you're smart enough to know that (despite what opponents of the PGR say about you). As for that other "pluralist guide," it is pretty much useless and in many respects an embarrassment. In fact, I'd take a high ranking on that guide to be a compelling (though not necessarily conclusive) reason to avoid the department in question.
These rankings are subject to change, revision, and alteration, without notice, explanation, or rationale, at any moment. Hope you find the Guide helpful.