Linkedin Facebook Instagram
Contact Us
Contact Us
Contact Us

Review, Don’t Redo: Reclaiming the Power of HUD’s MAP Strategy

HUD’s MAP program was designed for fast, efficient housing loan approvals, but has become bogged down by bureaucracy. Rob Hazelton urges a return to its original “Review, Don’t Redo” approach, trusting qualified partners, streamlining processes, and restoring speed to affordable housing development.

A Call to Action for Efficiency and Impact

HUD’s Office of Multifamily Housing Programs was built on a foundational mission: enabling rapid housing production through responsible and streamlined loan processing. The introduction of the Multifamily Accelerated Processing (MAP) Guide was a watershed moment, designed to eliminate bureaucratic delay and empower qualified lenders to move capital efficiently.

But today, that vision has been lost in the weeds. While Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have adapted to market volatility and maintained production capacity, HUD’s volume has dropped by over 71% from 2021 to 2024. Let that sink in — the agency charged with ensuring affordable housing is now trailing its peers by a wide margin, not because of the model, but because of the failure to trust and apply it.

The Numbers Don’t Lie


All three institutions faced the same headwinds: rising interest rates, soaring insurance premiums, and construction inflation. But only HUD fell off a cliff. Why? Because HUD forgot its own mantra: “Review, Don’t Redo.”
 
The Origin of Efficiency

HUD once led with innovation. In the 1990s, the Seattle office pioneered the Fast Track Process, slashing processing time from over a year to just a few months. That model evolved into the MAP Guide in 2000: a forward-thinking approach where licensed MAP lenders would vet the deal, and HUD would validate, not duplicate, their work.

It worked because it was grounded in trust, delegation, and accountability. Like Fannie’s DUS model or Freddie’s conventional execution platforms, the MAP framework gave private underwriters room to operate while preserving HUD’s oversight authority. And it worked — until it didn’t.
 
Every revision of the MAP Guide since 2000 has moved further from this core principle, layering on unnecessary reviews, overreach, and delays. The result? Frustrated borrowers, bloated timelines, and a system that now feels like a penalty box for developers trying to do the right thing.
 

The Root Problems

Let’s be clear: the MAP Guide and Single Underwriter Model still have the potential to outperform. But we’ve strayed from execution and lost sight of the following essentials:

  • Inconsistent implementation across regions
  • Undertrained and undermanned staff due to federal workforce reductions
  • Lack of triage at intake, leading to document overload
  • Misuse of third-party reports as staff training tools rather than decision aids
  • Delays caused by over-inspection and over-analysis, particularly on subsidized or RAD projects
  • Regulatory bloat, including overreliance on CPD’s HEROS system and onerous Davis-Bacon compliance rules

Even with clean lender submissions, reviews routinely exceed 180 days – a death sentence in today’s competitive real estate environment.

A Path Forward: Contract Underwriters and Process Discipline

The solution isn’t a reinvention, it’s a return.  HUD must re-embrace the MAP mantra and engage with experienced Contract Underwriters/Processors to bring discipline back into the system. Here’s how:

  1. Establish Front-End Triage
    Every submission should be scrubbed and summarized before it hits a HUD desk. Triage cuts through the clutter and prevents staff burnout.
  2. Standardize Deliverables
    Bring uniformity to third-party reports and make quality the rule, not the exception. Let HUD focus on review, not cleanup.
  3. Empower Outside Experts
    Contract Underwriters/Processors can bridge the gap between public oversight and private execution. They know the laws, financing layers, and environmental requirements and speak fluent development.
  4. Rebuild Trust
    Restore faith in the system by sticking to review, not redo. HUD can lead again if it stands behind its partners and holds them accountable.

Technical Expertise That Accelerates Results

A successful Contract Underwriter/Processor should be a force multiplier. HUD should demand and expect professionals who bring:

  • Fluency in environmental law, HEROS, and 24 CFR compliance
  • Mastery of complex financing structures and capital stacking
  • On-the-ground knowledge of market dynamics in all 50 states and territories
  • Digital tools that streamline underwriting models and populate systems efficiently
  • Deep legacy insight into the original intent and safeguards of the MAP process

Conclusion: Rebuild the Engine, Don’t Reinvent the Wheel

The private sector hasn’t given up on HUD. Developers and bankers still view HUD loan terms as the best in the industry, but they need speed, consistency, and predictability to make deals work.  Let’s stop treating MAP like an obstacle course and return it to what it was meant to be: a fast, accountable, and effective vehicle for housing production. 

Let’s review, not redo. 

HUD doesn’t need a new system. It requires the courage to trust the one it has built — and the partners ready to make it run.

Related News