That’s not quite my logic. In fact, I don’t know that I’ve ever called TRACS an accreditation mill, although I’ve been critical of TRACS for some 30 years, even to the extent of writing a full-length book on them that hung up their reapproval by US-DoEd for almost two years. My objection to TRACS historically has been that they were approved by DoEd under shady circumstances, and that their doctrinal position is both unconstitutional and discriminatory. I’ve discussed this both in my book and over the years in these fora, so I have no desire to repeat myself in this thread. At this point, my objections include the notion that they have gone beyond their historic scope in terms of the institutions they accredit and that their standards continue to be mickey mouse. For a fairly accurate historic overview of TRACS, read their wiki at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_Association_of_Christian_Colleges_and_Schools. Notable in the wiki is the list of TRACS-accredited schools, some of which are so ridiculously small they make VUL look big. I’ve noticed that their current list includes more HBCU’s than when I last looked at the list, and imagine that an HBCU association has put the word out that TRACS accreditation is easier to get than regional. I certainly don’t blame the HBCU’s for that, since the goal in getting recognized by TRACS is likely to have their students qualify for federal funding. Regardless of the quality of TRACS compared to the regionals, the fact that they are recognized by DoEd and CHEA accomplishes that goal. As for holding that non-regional accreditors are accreditation mills, I have never held that position. To do so would condemn highly respected professional accreditors like ABA, AMA, APA, CACREP, ad infinitum. IMO, TRACS is and has always been mickey mouse, but an accreditation mill? Hardly.