Accreditation is critical for institutions of higher education. Not only is it an indication of academic quality, but it also provides a level of assurance to the public that the institution is fulfilling its mission, equipping students with a rigorous academic experience, and engaging in systematic peer review processes to continuously strengthen the educational quality of an institution. Accreditation also helps to facilitate the transfer of credits between postsecondary institutions, and it provides students with access to Title IV federal student aid. If an institution loses its accreditation, it will have a significant impact on the sustainability and survival of a higher education institution. Traditionally, there were three general types of accrediting agencies, each serving in their own purpose. Regional accrediting agencies operated in six regions of the United States and concentrated their reviews on institutions of higher education within specific regions of the country. National accrediting agencies reviewed institutions with a common theme, for example, religiously affiliated or vocation focused institutions. Finally, programmatic accrediting agencies operate nationwide and review programs and single-purpose institutions. 
Dr. Kevin James
The largest and most diverse accreditation body for historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) is the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) which serves as the postsecondary accreditor for the 11 southern states: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. As of 2017, 80 of the 101 HBCUs were located within those states, giving SACSCOC a disproportionate influence over HBCUs. While accreditation is essentially fundamental for institutions of higher education, some have argued that the accreditation process is biased toward HBCUs.
Specifically, pundits and scholars have pointed out that the SACSCOC employs peer review processes that may be implicitly unfair to HBCUs. For example, according to a white paper from the United Negro College Fund, HBCUs accredited by the SACSCOC have been sanctioned at a higher rate compared to their non-HBCU counterparts. Further, this paper also noted that several HBCUs were either placed on warning or on probation from 1998 to 2013. Moreover, HBCUs accredited by SACSCOC, such as Morris Brown College, Barber-Scotia College, Paul Quinn, St. Paul’s College, and Bennett College, had their accreditation revoked. Conversely seven HBCUs, such as Bennett College; Clinton College; Morris Brown College; Paine College; Paul Quinn College; Shorter College, and Virginia University of Lynchburg have been able to gain an accreditation status with the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS). Moreover, several other HBCUs have expressed interest in moving to TRACS.
According to its website, TRACS was founded in 1979 “as a voluntary, non-profit, self-governing organization to promote the welfare, interests, and development of postsecondary institutions whose mission is characterized by a distinctly Christian purpose . . .” TRACS currently accredits approximately 90 schools in 21 states, with 6 overseas locations. TRACS is recognized by the United States Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). It is also a member of the International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE). While TRACS has been in existence for over 40 years, there are many who may not be familiar with this accreditation body. Since it is not one of the more well-known six regional accreditation bodies, the higher education community might not be aware of TRACS as a national accreditor, and therefore may perceive that the quality of the national accreditation differs from regional accreditation agencies.
These perceived concerns, however, are not grounded. Indeed, according to a letter from the US Department of Education released on February 26th, 2020, entitled Final Accreditation and State Authorization Regulations, “[US Department of Education] holds all accrediting agencies to the same standards.” Specifically, this document indicated that “distinctions between regional and national accrediting agencies are unfounded…. As a result of new regulations, instead of distinguishing between regional and national accredited agencies, the Department will only distinguish between institutional and programmatic accrediting agencies. The US Department of Education also expresses to states that they should consider alignment with their new regulations. Moreover, the US Department of Education no longer uses the terms, “regional” or “national” to refer to an accreditation agency.” 
Dr. Robert T. Palmer
