The authors review widely accepted criteria for program accreditation and compare gerontology with well-established accredited fields including clinical psychology and social work. At present gerontology lacks many necessary elements for credible professional accreditation, including defined scope of practice, applied curriculum, faculty with applied professional credentials, and resources necessary to support professional credentialing review. Accreditation with weak requirements will be dismissed as "vanity" accreditation, and strict requirements will be impossible for many resource-poor programs to achieve, putting unaccredited programs at increased risk for elimination. Accreditation may be appropriate in the future, but it should be limited to professional or applied gerontology, perhaps for programs conferring bachelor's or master's degrees. Options other than accreditation to enhance professional skills and employability of gerontology graduates are discussed.