There have been a lot of edits to this answer. As a supervisor, I've independently verified that the answer below is substantially correct and am locking the answer to keep shills from changing it further.
Note that "PSU" below refers to the diploma mill "Phoenix State University", not to any other schools which may share the same initials (Pennsylvania State University, Pittsburg State University, etc.) or any other school it might be confused with (Arizona State University in Phoenix AZ, the University of Phoenix (which despite being an explicitly for-profit school does have accreditations that are traceable back to the USDoE/CHEA), etc.).
Gregg DesElms originally made a very complete and accurate answer to the question. Someone then came in after him and removed it, replacing it with the following, as if to make it look like DesElms had written it:
By court order, I am required to post the following: "I previously posted negative information about PSU without ever taking a course, from my own web research. Some of what I posted was not true. PSU is accredited independently. Please visit PSUanswers.com for the complete discussion of accreditation. PSU credentials are valid for successful licensure, trade acceptance, wholesale buying, bonding, insurance and many other benefits in many trades."
Gregg DesElms now writes:
The above statement has been added, obviously, by someone who has a vested interest in this institution. No court anywhere has ordered anyone -- least of all me -- to make any such statement. It is, simply, a lie.
Because it's clearly intended to look as if I wrote it, I'm sure I could have just deleted it without violating the rules of this place, but I wanted the reader to see the tactics and lengths to which diploma mill operators will go to deceive.
And let's be painfully clear: PSU is not "accredited independently." It's not accredited at all. Period. Neither are its credentials good for any kind of licensing, anywhere on the planet... or in the universe, I'll bet. It's a rip-off. A scam. Do not be fooled.
After I posted the below some time ago, someone who obviously didn't like my exposing the institution as a diploma mill came here and completely deleted it... leaving only the above "court order" silliness, as if to make it look like I had written said above... as if I were the one under some kind of court order.
Here's what I originally wrote: If you're inquiring about the entity found here:
http:/www.e-psu.com
or here
http:/www.phoenixstateuniversity.org
then the answer is, emphatically, "NO, it is NOT accredited!"
This completely fake institution claims accreditation from an agency (a completely fake accreditor), the web site is clearly of its own making; and it claims affiliation with a church the web site of which is clearly of its own making.
In the United States, an agency is generally not an educational accreditor unless it is approved by the US Secretary of Education, which is who heads-up the US Department of Education (USDE). The agency approved by USDE to oversee and manage pretty much everything that has anything to do with educational accreditation in the US is the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). Once you know what I've written in the above paragraph, figuring out which institutions are accredited, and which are not -- and also figuring out which accreditors are legitimate, and which are not -- is really simple. As long as you remember the two things I'm about to write, below, you needn't ever again go to forums or chat rooms or blogs or email lists and ask if a given institution, or its accreditor, is legitimate.
Simply, a given accreditor (or alleged accreditor), or a given accredited (or allegedly accredited) school isn't listed on the CHEA web site, then it's got nothing to do with legitimate, government-approved accreditation. Period.
List of the four types of accreditors http:/chea.org/Directories/index.asp
Search CHEA database of accredited schools http:/chea.org/search
Search the USDE database of accredited schools
http://ope.ed.gov/accreditation
The debate/argument between those who believe that proper, government-approved accreditation (such as that discussed on the CHEA web site) is the only right way to do things, and those who believe that schools can be legitimate and still not accredited, is an intense and sometimes ugly one. It's true that there are excellent -- and I mean really excellent -- schools out there that are unaccredited. Just because a given school isn't accredited dooesn't mean it isn't still good... sometimes quite good. But the problem is that without accreditation, there's no way to really tell in any meaningful and objective way whether the unaccredited school is really any good. And, of course, accredited colleges and universities (as well as many employers and government agencies) will typically not recognize credits or degrees from unaccredited schools.
In the end, even though there may very well be really good unaccredited schools which issue respectable credentials, the only way to ensure that you will never have to worry about how your degree will be received is to make sure that the institution which issues it is accredited.
As long as a given college or university is listed on the CHEA web site (e.g., searchable in its database), then it's accredited. Be advised that there are different types of accreditation, which you can also learn about on the CHEA web site. The most common type is "regional" accreditation, but there are three other types, as can be seen on the CHEA web site. When making decisions about which accredited institution to attennd, be sure that you understand the ultimate usefulness of its particular type of accreditation.
PHOENIX STATE UNIVERSITY is obviously trying to pull a fast one. Even if its certificates are legitimate (e.g., even if they require legitimate work and can't simply be purchased, as with a diploma mill), the fact that it touts a completely fake accreditor -- the web site of which is of its own creation (indicating, simply, that the accreditor is owned by the same people who own the "university") -- is proof enough of its shifty ways.
LOCKSMITH COMMENT:
I checked on PSU's statement that they offer the only "bonding" service for locksmiths and this is partially true. You can now only get bonded through Locksmith Ledger, ASLPA.org or Phoenix State as a locksmith, due to many banks and AIG withdrawing surety for honor bonds. So, they are one of three that offer bonding, not the "only" one. The bigger issue is that ALL these online schools have immense issues. If you Google "XXX Scams" and fill in the blank for ANY online school, trade oriented or not, you will find terrible complaints. PSU charges several hundred for their courses, whereas, for example, the University of Phoenix ("accredited") actually puts liens on your house, takes out loans on top of your Pell, and many other surprising tactics.
Our daughter took a locksmith course there, and she got an 866 number with her enrollment package, which was in South Dakota.
Someone else then added to what DesElms wrote:
What you say above is for the most part true. However, many private and state universities etc are not accredited in the manner that you speak of . As for the Dept of Education, in my experience their main concern is qualifying institutions in order to receive federal money. Their list of accredited universities, colleges, etc is mainly based on their own system of accreditation which is based upon who is receiving federal monies which is based on those that are accredited by any accreditation organization etc, etc. They also played a major roll in instituting on line courses from all state institutions or institutions receiving any monies from the federal government.
As for PSU, you are correct, they are a scam. Disregard the accreditation; any web site that does not include a contact telephone number is a scam. Sounds good, in fact to good to be true. Any ordained pastor can and does counsel but hardly ever for money.
DesElms then responded:
What I wrote is not merely "for the most part true." It is completely true. Accreditation is one of my consultative areas of expertise. People PAY me to help them understand it. And I am an avowed anti-diploma mill activist who does not suffer fools where this sort of thing is concerned. So please forgive me for these efforts of mine to make absolutely sure that the answer to this question is absolutely correct; and that no one is mislead... either by answers directly related to the question, or by related subjects which have susequently cropped-up herein.
Very few truly credible educational institutions are unaccredited (though, it's true that some are); and NO educational institution which claims to be "accredited" by anything other than a USDE- and/or CHEA-approved agency is credible. Any educational institution which claims accreditation by anything other than a USDE- and/or CHEA-approved agency is trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. It cannot be trusted... for ANYTHING.
The rest of what the above person wrote is not really even understandable to me. It's not about qualifying institutions to receive federal money. And it's not about some kind of meaningless criterion of "their own system of accreditation" which is based merely on who's receiving federal money, or who's accredited by what agency, or anything of that sort which doesn't seem to have anything to do with the quality of what is taught, and how it is taught. It's not anywhere NEAR as simple (and seemingly pointless) as that.
It also has nothing to do with "instituting on line courses from all state institutions or institutions receiving any monies from the federal government," or whatever that even means.
People throw-around the term "accredited" or "accreditation" quite loosely in the United States... and often wrongly. In my opinion, it should be a protected word, like "lawyer" or "attorney" which cannot be used in any kind of print unless it is referring to accreditation by an agency approved by the US Department of Education (USDE) and/or the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). Nothing else qualifies as "accreditation." Nothing.
With the exception of the state of New York, which has special dispensation from the USDE for accrediation purposes (and even then, only in a certain way), NO US STATE ACCREDITS. Period. States can approve an educational institution to exist... even to issue degrees (though, when so, I think it's a bad idea until and unless said institution is finally actually accredited). But the state, by so doing, does not "accredit." And no entity other than those approved by USDE and/or CHEA may "accredit." Anything not approved by USDE and/or CHEA is little more than a nefarious "accreditation mill."
That said, as is true with educational institutions which are so new that they haven't had a chance to be accredited yet, there may be agencies out there which claim to "accredit" and which haven't yet been approved by USDE and/or CHEA. However, if they're TRULY legitimate, then they will not call what they do "accreditation" until they have finally been approved as an accreditor by USDE and/or CHEA.
It's that way with educational institutions, too: Unaccredited educational institutions which are nevertheless credible, and which plan on becoming accredited and are only waiting until they've been in business long enough that they can finally apply to be accredited, will usually not call their credentials "degrees." And they will explain that they don't want to use that word to describe what they award to students who complete their programs until they are actually accredited by a USDE- and/or CHEA-approved agency. Until that happens, they may call their awards "certificates" or "diplomas" or something like that. That is the honorable way to handle it.
Accreditors which haven't yet been approved to accredit by USDE and/or CHEA, but which are nevertheless credible, will usually avoid using the word "accredt" to describe what they do. They'll use the word "approve" instead... at least until they're finally USDE and/or CHEA approved.
It is the common ploy of those who just refuse to accept what accreditation really and truly is, and what it really and truly accoomplishes, to somehow denigrate the accreditation system, or the USDE; and/or to try to reduce what it all means to a simple matter of being a mere technicality so that either institutions or students (or both) can get federal money or financial aid. While that is, in fact, part of it, it's far, far more (and far, far more consequential) than merely that.
USDE- and/or CHEA-approved accreditation, more than anything else, is about ensuring that what's taught, and how it's taught, meets certain minimum standards so that courses taught at one accredited school may be easily and safely transferred to other accredited schools; and so that degrees issued by one accredited school may be used as requisite to higher-level degrees offered by other accredited schools.
Accreditation is also about ensuring that all accredited schools are financially solvent, and conform to good and safe financial and management standards.
Accreditation is also about ensuring that all teachers, professors, etc., are fully qualified to teach the courses that they teach; to ensure that their degrees are from properly accredited institutions; and that said degrees truly prepare the instructor to teach the course(s) s/he teaching. And that there are enough instructors.
The only thing that federal money has to do with any of it is that once a given educational institution meets the minimum standards in all of those areas, the federal govenment can feel safe to let some money flow to either the institution itself, or to its students in the form of financial aid. Accreditation is not merely a random categorization of schools which so do. It's not just making sure that the right eggs are in the right baskets. Accreditation is about ensuring QUALITY. That is why, in most other English-speaking countries which have a culture of educational accountability, and which require of their educational institutions that they be approved and accredited, the agency which does the accrediting has the word "quality" (and usually, also, the word "assurance" following it) in its name.
Diploma mills are a huge business. The make for their owners literally millions of dollars. Said owners have a high stake in confusing the issues and hopefully causing potential students to be duped and to pay them for their fake credentials. Said students then, later, live to regret it... some of them even face, in some states, criminal charges for having fake credentials from nefarious diploma mills.
Claiming fake accreditation (which is pretty much any"accreditation" which isn't granted by a USDE- and/or CHEA-approved agency) is one of the diploma millist's biggest tricks. Trying to confuse the public about what accreditation really means is one of their second-biggest tricks. DO NOT BE FOOLED.
Rely on what you read on the USDE and/or CHEA web sites. And then, if you'd really like to understand diploma mills (and accreditation mills), pick-up a copy of this book:
Degree Mills: The Billion-dollar Industry That
Has Sold Over A Million Fake Diplomas
by Allen Ezell and John Bear
Paperback: 318 pages, English
Publisher: Prometheus Books; 1st edition (January 2005)
ISBN-10: 159102238X or ISBN-13: 978-1591022381
It's an eye-opening, must-read book for anyone who trul wants to understand this troubling subject.
Someone else then added:
Domain name contact info for PSU is as follows...
ESTATE TRANSACTIONS INC.
email: vj9nz8cp8hn@networksolutionsprivateregistration.com
ATTN: E-PSU.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 459
Drums, PA 18222
Phone: 570-708-8780
DesElms adds:
Indeed. Obfuscated domain name registration is very common with diploma mills. They know they're criminals, so they obviously don't want to make it easy for anyone to know who they are. So the degree-seeker consider PSU needs to ask himself/herself if he would ever want to give his/her hard-earned money to a place that's keeping secret something as basic as who they really are.
Res ipsa loquitur. (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself.")
the bodyguard
To be a bodyguard, stamina, strength, skill, speed and moderate intelligence. To have a bodyguard, money.
The duration of My Bodyguard is 1.6 hours.
The bodyguard is a Mod that has to be downloaded
My Bodyguard was created on 1980-07-11.
Bodyguard of Lies was created in 1975.
genius why do you think a famous person has a bodyguard
Thomas Arana Is The Unknown Stalker In The Bodyguard Movie.
The duration of The Royal Bodyguard is 1800.0 seconds.
Bodyguard of Lies has 947 pages.
The cast of Epoch of Lotus - 2000 includes: Robert Alonzo as Bodyguard Stephanie Cheeva as Bodyguard Tony Chu as Bodyguard Maria Eberline as Jocasta Ken Gamble as Bodyguard Michael Su as Bodyguard Jon Valera
Beyonce's bodyguard name is Julius.