Ginnie Mae:

Risk Management and Staffing-Related Challenges Need to Be Addressed

GAO-19-191: Published: Apr 3, 2019. Publicly Released: May 3, 2019.

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Daniel Garcia-Diaz
(202) 512-8678
garciadiazd@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

Ginnie Mae, a government-owned corporation, is a major player in the housing finance market. It has grown to guarantee over $2 trillion worth of mortgage-backed securities—which encourages investors to provide capital for mortgage loans with a promise that they'll receive payments even if the borrowers default.

Ginnie Mae's growth has raised concerns. We examined how it manages risks; its staffing issues such as heavy reliance on contractors and limited budget for in-house staff; and how its oversight differs from other entities with similar functions.

Our recommendations help address these concerns and improve oversight of Ginnie Mae.

The unpaid principal on the mortgages backing Ginnie Mae's securities, which is a measure of Ginnie Mae's potential fiscal risk

Line chart showing growth from around $500 billion in 2005 to around $2 trillion in 2018

Line chart showing growth from around $500 billion in 2005 to around $2 trillion in 2018

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Daniel Garcia-Diaz
(202) 512-8678
garciadiazd@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

What GAO Found

The amount of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) guaranteed rose from $500 billion to $2 trillion in fiscal years 2007–2018—exposing it to a greater risk of loss. From 2011 to 2018, the majority of institutions issuing Ginnie Mae-guaranteed MBS (issuers) shifted from banks to nonbanks, such as mortgage lenders. Unlike banks, nonbank issuers generally are not consistently subject to comprehensive federal safety and soundness standards.

Since GAO's 2011 report, Ginnie Mae increased minimum financial requirements for MBS issuers and developed new tools to monitor them. However, it has limited flexibility under law to raise the fee charged to guarantee single-family MBS in response to changes in risks. Ginnie Mae also has not assessed if the current fee would provide it with sufficient capital reserves to withstand losses under various scenarios, which would be consistent with federal internal control and risk-management standards. Such an analysis would provide Ginnie Mae with information necessary to help ensure the fee is set appropriately and inform Congress whether Ginnie Mae needs greater flexibility to adjust the fee.

As GAO reported in 2011, Ginnie Mae still faces contracting and staffing challenges. It continues to rely heavily on contractors (because it has authority to use certain fee revenue to fund contractors but not its own in-house staff). However, it has not routinely analyzed if using its own in-house staff instead of contractors for certain functions would be more efficient. Such analyses could help inform Ginnie Mae and Congress about the optimal mix of contractors and staff and potential need for greater budget flexibility. Ginnie Mae also still faces challenges recruiting and retaining staff, in part due to its lower pay scale relative to some of its competitors. But it has not exhausted all options under its current authority to revise its pay scale to mitigate these challenges or evaluated the costs and benefits of other options. Such actions could help inform Ginnie Mae about how it could use current authorities to address these challenges and provide Congress with the information needed to consider providing Ginnie Mae with additional pay flexibility.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) oversees and sets general policies that govern Ginnie Mae's operations. However, GAO previously reported that HUD's management challenges limit the effectiveness of its oversight of Ginne Mae and its other programs. In light of these challenges and Ginnie Mae's increasing risks, GAO reviewed the oversight structures of three similar financial entities and found that certain alternative structures used by these entities, such as boards of directors, offer potential oversight benefits that could be considered as part of any future reform proposals for Ginnie Mae. As GAO previously reported, if Congress considers legislation to reform the federal role in housing finance, such reforms would need to be comprehensive and consider all relevant federal entities, including Ginnie Mae. As part of such reforms, it also would be important to ensure that Ginnie Mae is adequately overseen and its risks effectively managed.

Why GAO Did This Study

Ginnie Mae, a government corporation within HUD, plays a significant role in the secondary mortgage market. Institutions issue MBS (backed by federally insured or guaranteed mortgages). Ginnie Mae guarantees MBS investors timely payments of principal and interest on the MBS if issuers cannot make such payments. In 2011, GAO identified challenges related to Ginnie Mae's issuer oversight, staffing, and contracting.

GAO was asked to re-examine these issues. This report reviews Ginnie Mae's (1) MBS volume, issuers, and risks; (2) oversight of issuers and related risks; (3) staff levels and contractor use; and (4) oversight structure compared to selected entities to identify areas for potential reforms. GAO analyzed data on MBS volume, reviewed Ginnie Mae policies and procedures, reviewed oversight structures of three similar financial entities, and interviewed agency officials.

What GAO Recommends

GAO makes four recommendations to Ginnie Mae, including that it evaluate its issuer guaranty fee, contractor use, and alternative compensation structures. GAO also makes recommendations to Congress to consider requiring Ginnie Mae to report on its evaluations of (1) the adequacy of its issuer guaranty fee, (2) its reliance on contractors and use of certain fee revenue to hire in-house staff, and (3) use of greater flexibility to set staff compensation; and (4) to consider possible reforms to Ginnie Mae's oversight structure. Ginnie Mae concurred with GAO's recommendations.

For more information, contact Daniel Garcia-Diaz at (202) 512-8678 or garciadiazd@gao.gov.

Matters for Congressional Consideration

  1. Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2020, Congress had not enacted legislation to require Ginnie Mae to evaluate the adequacy of its current guaranty fee for single-family mortgage-backed securities and report to Congress with recommendations.

    Matter: Congress should consider requiring Ginnie Mae to evaluate the adequacy of its current guaranty fee for single-family mortgage-backed securities and report to Congress with recommendations, if any, on revising the fee, such as by adopting standards under which the fee should be determined. (Matter for Consideration 1)

  2. Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2020, Congress had not enacted legislation to require Ginnie Mae to evaluate its reliance on contractors and report to Congress on its findings.

    Matter: Congress should consider requiring Ginnie Mae to evaluate its reliance on contractors and report to Congress on how it would use fee revenue available to hire contractors to also hire in-house staff. (Matter for Consideration 2)

  3. Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2020, Congress has not enacted legislation to require Ginnie Mae to report on how it would use greater flexibility or broader authority to set the compensation of its in-house staff.

    Matter: Congress should consider requiring Ginnie Mae to provide a report on how it would use greater flexibility or broader authority to set the compensation of its in-house staff. (Matter for Consideration 3)

  4. Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2020, Congress has not enacted legislation that considers reforms to Ginnie Mae's oversight structure that can help address its increasing risks.

    Matter: Congress should consider reforms to Ginnie Mae's oversight structure that can help address its increasing risks. (Matter for Consideration 4)

Recommendations for Executive Action

  1. Status: Open

    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Ginnie Mae (HUD) agreed with this recommendation. As of September 2020, Ginnie Mae took steps to address this recommendation. First, according to its 2020 budget justification, Ginnie Mae has concluded that it would be advantageous to have the authority to administratively adjust its guarantee fee and requested that the permissible guarantee fee be established within a range. Upon receipt of this authority, Ginnie Mae would then establish an administrative process through which an adjustment could be made. Second, Ginnie Mae has developed a stress test framework and solicited public comment. According to officials, by early 2021, Ginnie Mae plans to have its contractor develop an economic model to explore the current level of the guaranty fee under different economic scenarios including variations in issuer types and across Ginnie Mae programs. To fully implement this recommendation, Ginnie Mae needs to follow through on this effort and provide additional detail on changes to the existing models and its plan to periodically conduct this analysis. We will continue to monitor Ginnie Mae's progress in implementing our recommendation.

    Recommendation: The Chief Risk Officer of Ginnie Mae should periodically conduct an actuarial or similar analysis that includes a stress test to evaluate the extent to which the current level of the guaranty fee for single-family MBS provides Ginnie Mae with sufficient reserves to cover potential losses under different economic scenarios. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency Affected: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

  2. Status: Open

    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Ginnie Mae (HUD) agreed with this recommendation. As of September 2020, Ginnie Mae said it procured a contractor to do this analysis on their behalf at the end of fiscal year 2020. Officials expected the cost analysis to commence in early 2021. To fully implement this recommendation, Ginnie Mae should ensure the analysis and plan are completed. We will continue to monitor Ginnie Mae's progress in implementing our recommendation.

    Recommendation: The Senior Vice President of Ginnie Mae's Office of Management Operations should analyze the costs of using contractors for its operations and develop a plan to determine the optimal mix of contractor or in-house staff for operations. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency Affected: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

  3. Status: Open

    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Ginnie Mae (HUD) agreed with this recommendation. As of October 2020, Ginnie Mae stated it assesses procurement approaches on a per contract basis on whether to administer a contract within HUD or outsource the contract administration. However, GAO recommends Ginnie Mae comprehensively evaluate whether the outsourcing of its contract administration has met its intended purposes and is the most efficient and effective use of funds. In order to implement this recommendation, Ginnie Mae should reevaluate its decision to use an external provider.

    Recommendation: The Senior Vice President of Ginnie Mae's Office of Management Operations should assess its contract administration options to determine the most efficient and effective use of funds. (Recommendation 3)

    Agency Affected: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

  4. Status: Open

    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Ginnie Mae (HUD) agreed with this recommendation. As of September 2020, Ginnie Mae has taken steps to assess options to revise its compensation structure. More specifically, according to Ginnie Mae, in the development of its fiscal year 2020 budget request, Ginnie requested authority to develop alternative pay options, such as premium pay, pay bands and critical pay. In August 2020, Ginnie Mae was given authority to proceed with implementing critical pay by the Office of Personnel Management. Critical Pay authority permits an agency to set a higher rate of basic pay than would otherwise be payable for a position that requires expertise of an extremely high level in a scientific, technical, professional, or administrative field and is critical to the successful accomplishment of an important mission. As of September 2020, Ginnie Mae is working with HUD on developing an implementation plan to implement critical pay within its Office of Enterprise Risk. In addition, Ginne Mae is working with OMB to ensure program execution and outcomes are aligned between the agencies. We will continue to monitor Ginnie Mae's progress in implementing our recommendation.

    Recommendation: The Chief Financial Officer of Ginnie Mae and Senior Vice President of Ginnie Mae's Office of Management Operations should finalize efforts to assess the costs and benefits of options to revise its compensation structure within current authority and submit proposals, if warranted, to HUD for review and consideration. (Recommendation 4)

    Agency Affected: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

 

Explore the full database of GAO's Open Recommendations »

Sep 22, 2020

Sep 4, 2020

Jul 21, 2020

Jul 6, 2020

Apr 30, 2020

  • finance icon, source: Comstock

    Priority Open Recommendations:

    Department of the Treasury
    GAO-20-549PR: Published: Apr 23, 2020. Publicly Released: Apr 30, 2020.

Apr 27, 2020

Apr 21, 2020

Apr 20, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here