The process of accreditation review in the U.S. serves two primary functions: quality assurance and continual improvement. The experienced educators who voluntarily serve on accreditation teams apply common standards of quality that serve students and meet public accountability expectations and offer suggestions and recommendations for institutional consideration and improvement. In the last decade, regional accreditation commissions and national professional and specialized accreditation agencies have increasingly focused on student learning results and institutional improvement. There has been a corresponding shift in focus from institutional resources, structures, and inputs as the primary indicators of institutional quality, toward increased emphasis on student learning results, appropriate to the degree level and mission of the institution. Accreditation review team reports are rich sources for examples of institutional practices that engage student learning. What have not been readily available to accreditation teams, however, are compilations of examples of good institutional practice. The suggestions offered here are drawn in large part from a study of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, through the National Survey of Student Engagement, demonstrated that they have effective practices for fostering success among students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions--called DEEP schools here because they were studied for the project on Documenting Effective Educational Practices--clearly communicate that they value high quality undergraduate teaching and learning. (Lists 2 sources.)