FHA Lean - Healthcare Lender - Lean program blog

FHA 232 LEAN Rates Processing Time

2011-05-28T06:18:00.000-07:00

FHA 232 LEAN rates are near historic lows with most FHA 232 / 223 F deals closing with sub 4% rates plus MIP for 35 years.

The loan process still takes over 9 months for refinances and much longer for new construction. After adjusting the appraisal for FHA CAP Rate and all the other rules typically LTV for refinances are in 70% to 76% range.

Freddie Mac announced it is expanding its refinance program for senior housing and this may provide faster refinances for larger deals at slightly lower LTV. Call for a Quote.

For new construction and rehab deals that must close fast we have a an equity investor willing to joint venture that will provide conventional construction loan.

FHA 232 LEAN Letter

2011-03-24T11:55:00.000-07:00

LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS AND SECTION 232 NEW CONSTRUCTION/SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION PROJECTS:

Provided the Firm Applications are submitted in a timely manner, HUD reserves the right to adjust its Other Queue to give preference to processing new construction and substantial rehabilitation Section 232’s that include Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to meet placed in service deadlines on specific projects. We encourage lenders to submit the Firm Applications on these projects in such a manner that will allow as much time as possible for HUD to act on the applications – including reviewing whether our 2 Stage Firm Application process will provide for such.

CHANGES TO OUR PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING SEASONING OF DEBT:

The April 10, 2009 Email Blast discussed our definition of Eligible Debt and the two and five year seasoning rules. Although this language was silent on the date that the seasoning is based upon, we have consistently required that the two or five year period must have passed prior to the application being submitted (entering our queue). Because of the length of time that projects are spending in our queues, we are changing how we will handle this. Effective immediately, the two and five year time period will be based upon when a project is assigned to an OHP Underwriter (exits our queue). Lenders may choose to submit a project prior to the seasoning period expiring, however, if the project reaches the top of the queue prior to the debt being properly seasoned, the project will be placed on hold. Lenders submitting projects in such a manner must regularly monitor the project’s progression through the queue and contact a Workload Manager at HUD (prior to the project being assigned to an OHP Underwriter) if it becomes evident that the project will be assigned prior to the seasoning period expiring.

REFUNDS OF HUD APPLICATION FEE:

We understand that HUD is no longer issuing refund checks - all refunds are being handled by Direct Deposit. To accommodate this procedure, when requesting refunds in the future, please use the attached document as a template for your letter requesting the refund. This document will be posted to HUD.GOV in the future.

MANAGEMENT AGENT AND OPERATOR GRID:

Please see the attached grid. This document addresses HUD’s closing document requirements for operators and management agents to ensure that HUD has a valid security and regulatory interest in the project assets of the healthcare facility. Particularly of note, this grid addresses the document signing requirements of the operator and/or management agent for the operating lease, license, equipment, provider agreements, deposit accounts and facility repairs. This document will be posted to “Sample Closing Documents” on HUD.GOV in the future.

STALE DATE ON PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS:

We have been asked numerous times in the past few months to waive the stale date on Phase I Environmental Reports – listed in the endnotes on our Checklists. We have turned down all such requests as we are unable to waive this requirement.

CLOSING QUEUE:

We will soon be posting our closing queues to HUD.GOV. Until these are posted, please see the attached two spreadsheets, which list the projects in our closing queues. Projects will be assigned from the top to bottom of the spreadsheets. Currently we have three closing coordinators working on the non 223(a)(7) queue (one of these individuals concentrates on Insured Advances projects).

CLARIFICATION ON MINIMUM LEASE PAYMENTS:

During the closing of Section 232 loans, OHP and OGC have encountered confusion on the minimum lease payment required for closing documents and operating leases. For the actual leases, we are requiring that the annual lease payment be calculated using a minium of a 1.05 coverage ratio - annual principal + annual interest + annual mortgage insurance premium + annual reserve for replacement deposit + annual property and liability insurance + annual property taxes times a multiplier of 1.05. This minimum coverage level required for executed leases is different than the test measurement used in the 223 F Lender’s Narrative, which remains unchanged - it will continue at the 1.17 coverage level.

REVISED CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION TEMPLATE:

OHP will be following the revised construction specification template discussed in HUD Mortgagee Letter 2010-41 – see attached. All Firm Applications submitted to HUD on or after April 25, 2011, must use the new CSI MasterFormat 2010. Future revisions to our checklists and other documents posted to HUD.GOV will reflect this revised document.

CHANGES TO OUR STANDARD DOCUMENTS:

Please do not change Lean Approved exhibits posted on HUD.GOV. This includes, but is not limited to, submitting exhibits in MS Excel or QuattroPro when they are to be in original Word format, adding or subtracting fields of information in current documents, and changing language in Firm Commitments. When these changes are made it takes Underwriters and Closing Coordinators extra time to identify and mitigate these unapproved changes and is contrary to the standardization required under Lean. We will be following the February 19, 2010 Email Blast and requesting a revision to the Firm Application when this situation is present.

In addition, if a section of the Lender Narrative or an exhibit is not applicable to your project, please note that it is “not applicable” and explain why you believe this is not applicable. No sections are to be left blank or deleted from the Template. Your cooperation with this request will help us process your application more quickly.

MARKET INTEREST RATE ABOVE RATE USED IN SECTION 223(A)(7) APPLICATIONS:

Given the recent rise in interest rates, interest rates proposed in applications under Lean Section 223(a)(7) may not longer be achievable. Please advise your assigned OHP Underwriter if this is the case so you can work to ensure your application is consistently updated throughout to reflect a more accurate interest rate at the time of Firm Commitment issuance. For applications still in the queue that are no longer feasible due to interest rate hikes, lenders can opt to withdraw their application and have the application fee returned.

Need to Reference Previous LEAN 232 Updates?

Previous E-Newsletters (Email Updates) can be found at:

http://portal.hud.gov/portal/page/portal/HUD/federal_housing_administration/healthcare_facilities/section_232/lean_processing_page/underwriting_guidance_home_page/previous_e_newsletters

FHA 223(f) FHA 221(d)(4) FHA 232 LEAN FHA 242

2010-03-26T19:26:00.001-07:00

FHA 232/223 F Healthcare Loan Programs

www.kendallrealtyadvisors.com

FHA LEAN Summary of Loan to Value and Debt Service Coverage FHA 232

2010-02-22T18:50:00.000-08:00

https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZ3HfXzExHJ3ZGRjZ2RodmpfMTMwdDhoa3dzZzk&hl=en

Guidance for Lenders for Market Rate Projects in Areas with Significant Adverse Economic Impacts:

2009-12-16T10:06:00.000-08:00

FHA 232 LEAN Market Conditions - FHA LEAN UPDATE REPRINTED

Areas of Concern - California, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois

The following is guidance to LENDERS regarding temporary risk management initiatives that have been implemented by OIHCF regarding the review of new construction market rate projects in areas that have been impacted by significant adverse economic conditions. In essence, OIHCF has received a number of applications for projects in areas that have been hard hit by the current economic crisis. After a thorough review of the current conditions in those areas most affected by adverse economic events, OIHCF has determined that the approval of certain market rate projects in those areas would place the FHA insurance fund at an elevated risk for higher defaults and an increase in potential insurance claims.

OIHCF recently directed one of our most experienced appraisers to Florida and Arizona to assess the prevailing market conditions for “market rate” assisted living projects. The assessment conducted in Florida was mainly contained to the area south of Tampa including the Bradenton and Sarasota areas. We are aware that the Miami, Orlando and Ft. Myers/Naples markets as well as other areas of Florida have also been severely impacted by the housing crisis and are similarly impacted. Our analysis of those areas has demonstrated a very high rate of foreclosures, a high rate of delinquent properties not yet in foreclosure, higher unemployment rates and increasing stress with the commercial real estate portfolio. OIHCF has determined that the market for assisted living projects in those areas may be far weaker than the current marketing data otherwise indicates.

With respect to Arizona, OIHCF reviewed and analyzed the potential assisted living market for the major urban areas of the state. The conclusion of our analysis indicated that the potential market for market driven assisted living was severely impacted by the housing crisis, with large numbers of vacant properties, severe price reductions and serious evolving problems with commercial real estate. It is also noteworthy that many of the Section 232 applications had weak operating entities that had little or no experience with assisted living projects. OIHCF staff has noticed that some recently reviewed Market Acceptance/preapplications and their attached market have been projecting optimistic market data from 2-3 years ago which has been projected forward without fully accounting for the current serious economic realities that have altered the market characteristics for those and other markets. As a result of the findings of our appraisal staff, OIHCF is instituting the following action:

For example, but not limited to the following geographic areas, OIHCF has determined that all market driven assisted living projects in California, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois are to be underwritten with FULL RISK MITIGATION. All mortgage insurance applications for properties in those states will be subjected to a full appraisal review and a full review of the market study and if necessary, a more thorough economic analysis. Market studies must take into account the changing economic conditions of the market areas where the facility is located, and both Lender and OIHCF reviews should reflect that reality.

With respect to nursing homes, lenders and OIHCF staff will review the fundamentals of each project. If the nursing homes are contemplated to have a high percentage of private pay residents or otherwise have unusual marketing issues, OIHCF staff will also undertake full risk mitigation. However, if nursing home applications have Certificates of Need, a patient mix that reflects the current market, and other positive underwriting characteristics, then processing will proceed without any change to the current instructions.

OIHCF will continually review the prevailing market conditions and will make appropriate changes as market circumstances dictate.

FHA LEAN LENDER Assisted Living and Nursing Home Loans

2009-08-18T19:08:00.000-07:00

FHA 232 LEAN loans = Assisted Living Facility Loans - Nursing Home Loan

Rates for refinance and purchases in high fives percent to low six percent including MIP.

See: FHA LEAN LENDER

FHA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac rates come back down some!

2009-06-27T10:21:00.000-07:00

With ten year treasuries having a good action last week, rates for healthcare and apartment loans came back down to the high 5% and low 6% range for refinances and purchase loans.

Lean Two Year Debt Rule

2009-04-11T09:00:00.000-07:00

Project debt that is less than 24 months old will need to be investigated and must meet the definition of “Eligible Debt” below (See Section Below) if it is to be used in the calculation of the cost to refinance. No investigation is needed on project debt that is at least 24 months old prior to using it in the calculation of the cost to refinance,provided the identity of interest described in the next sentence is not present,provided the identity of interest described in the next sentence is not present.

Definition of Eligible Debt: Project debt that meets any of the below definitions, may be included in the cost to refinance – there is no seasoning required.

1. Outstanding mortgage(s) incurred in connection with the construction or purchase of the project, or with capital improvements made to the property as confirmed by the current mortgagee – provided it can be demonstrated that there was no cash out to the mortgagor of the proposed FHA Insured loan or its principals. However, if the debt was incurred as a result of an identity of interest ** purchase, the debt is not considered eligible debt and must meet the seasoning requirements described herein. Furthermore, if the debt was incurred as a result of buying out a partner, the debt is not considered eligible debt and must meet the seasoning requirements above.

2. Other recorded indebtedness such as mechanic's liens and tax liens provided they did not result from personal obligations of the mortgagor.

3. Unrecorded debt directly connected with the project supported by documentation from the mortgagor. If the indebtedness is not recorded, the mortgagor must provide the Lender with documentation that substantially verifies that the obligation is directly connected to the project. Examples include:

a. Indebtedness incurred in making needed improvements and betterments to the property.

b. Indebtedness incurred or advances made to cover operating deficits.

4. Other eligible costs associated with paying off the eligible debt. Examples are:

a. Reasonable delinquent and accrued interest,

b. Reasonable prepayment penalties on the mortgage,

c. Recording, release, and re-conveyance fees,

d. Documentation or processing fees,

FHA 232 Lender Instruction for Assisted Living Loans

2009-02-15T10:26:00.000-08:00

Given the difficult economic and fiscal environment nationally, the Department is requesting that HUD approved Mortgagees exercise caution in underwriting loans under the LEAN Section 232 programs for new construction and refinance transactions for assisted living facilities. For all Assisted Living Project LEAN mortgage insurance applications under Section 223(f), Section 232 new construction and substantial rehabilitation, and Section 241(a), HUD will require justification/mitigation if the underwritten debt service coverage ratio (“DSCR”) is less than 1.45. Moreover, as was previously discussed with various lenders in June of 2008, for all LEAN mortgage insurance applications involving new construction of Assisted Living units, HUD will require justification/mitigation if the underwritten loan to value is greater than 75%.

The Department would consider, for example, a mitigating factor to be the inclusion of less expensive independent living units in the project or the presence of facility residents that are being provided with state or federal rental assistance subsidies. The Department’s review of mitigating factors will focus on any project specific attributes that result in limiting project market risk or in reducing project financial risk. The Department will be reasonable and flexible in determining where justifiable circumstances or mitigating factors exist.

Additional Guidance on the Use of Project Capitalization Rates:

The Department would like to provide general guidance regarding the usage of capitalization rates for Assisted Living projects. HUD believes that the capitalization rate should be a true reflection of conditions in the marketplace and the specific risks associated with a project. The Department is particularly concerned with the use (in some cases) of an approximate “risk free” capitalization rate for Assisted Living projects. The Department is not mandating a minimum capitalization rate. However, HUD may require justification/mitigation on Assisted Living projects if the capitalization rate used by the appraiser appears not to fully account for specific project and market related risks. This capitalization rate issue should be fully discussed in the Lender Narrative of the LEAN Application.

The Department believes that, in most but not all economic environments, the following debt service constant formula (Debt Service Constant + FHA MIP) multiplied by 1.25 would reflect reasonable guidance for the “minimum” capitalization rate for a proposed project. HUD would expect that the market realities of each project would dictate the capitalization rate to be used, which may be higher than the minimum formula. HUD does not wish to impose requirements for determining the capitalization rate and will defer to the USPAP appraisal standards to provide the definitive guidance on this issue. The Department’s guidance on capitalization rates is not mandatory and the Department understands that this guidance may not be as helpful as a guide when market and economic conditions are either highly optimistic or overly conservative and/or when the interest rate environment reflects unusually low or high project interest rates.

Example for calculating Cap Rate: 7% fixed interest rate plus the MIP of 50 basis points. {.0746+.50bp MIP=.0796*1.25=.0995 or 9.95%}. In this example, the minimum capitalization rate “guidance” is 9.95.

The revised guidance relative to the debt service coverage ratio, loan to value, and capitalization rates for assisted living projects shall apply to any future application for mortgage insurance where an FHA Project Number is issued after February 6, 2009. Alternatively, if the FHA number has not been issued but a project appraisal is underway, FHA will accept the lower DSCR of 1.3 for refinancing and 1.35 for new construction if an appraisal engagement letter was executed prior to February 6, 2009, and if appraisals using the lower DSCRs are finalized and provided to HUD prior to April 6, 2009. On projects that do not meet this revised guidance (where the FHA Project Number was issued on or prior to February 6, 2009) the Lender should provide a notification in the Check Transmittal Letter and Lender Narrative of the mortgage insurance application that provides for the discussion of the appraisal lender modifications.

Please note that the previous guidance on loan to value and debt service coverage on Section 232/223(f)’s for Skilled Nursing and Independent Living Facilities have not been revised.