mr. handelman, and i'll just follow up on something that i think mr. dold asked. he talked about 14% fraud, and let's assume for a second there is 14% fraud. and waste. fraud, waste and abuse because if you spend money on something, even if it's not fraud and they don't build the stuff they're supposed to build, it might not be fraud, but it's at least waste. if there's 14% fraud and waste in this program that you and i agree is an important program, what's the impact on this important program? >> you and i certainly agree that this is an important program. um, i understand that you've asked me to hypothetically assume that the 14% number, i'll say for benefit of the committee, we looked at the numbers produced by "the washington post," we're unable to replicate them, and the post did not release its analysis, so i have no confidence this that program. >> okay. if there is that kind of waste, is it bad for the program? >> yes. >> that's really what i was looking for is, you know, we all want to agree when we agree that there's a worthy program, we want the money i

mr. ethan handelman, vice president for policy and advocacy national conference. thank you for you patience having had a vote and then quite a long questioning period for the first panel. without objection, your written statements will be part of the record, and you're now each recognized for a five minute summary of your testimony starting with mr. mccarty who is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon chairman, chairwoman, ranking members, and members of the subcommittees. i'm john mccarty, acting deputy inspector general for the department of housing and i thank you for the opportunity to discuss our investigations -- >> could you pull that just a little bit closer to you? thank you. >> my testimony and work builds upon prior testimony in june of this year which related to findings, internal controls, and administration of the home program. over the past three years, we have opened 51 investigations based on allegations of fraud and home programs. subject to the investigations including executive directer of commune development departments and

mr. handelman, which you have any -- i think we all recognize, this is a huge project but it's a very important project. we want to make a come if we can help to make it work better. >> and i agree in improving the effectiveness of the program is important what i observed its cost effectiveness needs to be part of the calculation. it does not benefit us all collectively tend 0 to save 1 dollar. so as we look at ways to improve internal controls and monitoring competing at the subgrantees level, which i think potential is useful, i would hope we do in a cost effective way to maximize how much of program funding is creating a portal housing rather than enforcement. as mr. don gunther, a few moments ago, you would build the cost of enforcement into the grant which necessarily means it's taking away from funds that would go to create houses. >> and then mr. mccarty, in your testimony it appears that there's about 20% of your audits are conducted due to recommendations from hud. would that be a way, why doesn't hud recommend more of it? and would that be necessary? >> well, i think since they are th