A system for rating real estate agents is being tested by the National Association of Realtors, the trade association for realty pros and, at more than a million members, the largest trade group in the country.

Under the pilot program, clients of participating agents are being asked by a third-party vendor to complete a survey about their experiences in the transaction. Brokerage firms sign on to the program, but their agents are not required to participate.

Even those who decide to take part have the authority to block the results from being posted online. At the same time, though, agents cannot pick and choose which results they want posted. It's all in, or all out.

To some, the NAR program smacks of the proverbial wolf watching the hen house. To others, it is seen as a thinly veiled attempt to get ahead of the private market, where there is no shortage of ratings websites. There's even a site that offended agents can use to remove complaints from popular consumer site RipoffReport.

But NAR officials say the rating service is just one aspect of a larger "Realtor Excellence Program" designed to help brokers identify agent shortcomings and provide whatever education is necessary to bring them up to industry standards.

"Everyone seems to be focusing on the rating service, but I'm focusing on getting good consumer feedback," says Laurie Janik, NAR's chief counsel. "The bigger picture is that this is a way to enhance professionalism and have more satisfied buyers and sellers. Using the surveys, brokers can spot problems and weaknesses early on and get the agent the help or training they need."

Under the pilot program, brokers are able to use the survey results solely as internal feedback. But agents are given the choice of whether to participate or not. And they also are given the choice of whether to allow the results to be made public on the website RatedAgent.

In and of themselves, those parameters seem to limit the rating system as a true and open measure of an agent's abilities. In addition, the surveys are being sent only to participants of closed transactions, meaning that buyers or sellers who are dissatisfied with their agents' performance and failed to close a deal for one reason or another are left out of the loop.

But Janik says that is an effort to make sure survey respondents are truly clients. "This program is set up so that it can't be gamed," she says. "It's real buyers and sellers rating the agent they worked with in a transaction that has closed. Therefore, the ratings have validity. We don't want agents' mothers and friends rating them."

While NAR's general counsel plays down the ratings aspect of the excellence program, Quality Service Certification -- the San Juan Capistrano, Calif. company that designed the survey and sends it to participants -- says "agent ratings are coming," whether agents like it or not.

Agents ratings "are an important element of the decision-making process," says Larry Romito of Quality Service Certification in a white paper. "Denial of consumer interest or an unwillingness to participate will not change what's happening or even slow it down."

Consequently, the white paper says, realty professionals can "take the ball or give it to someone else." Either way, it adds, "the game will go on."

In an interview, Romito says the purpose of the surveys is to make real estate transactions more about buyers and sellers and less about their deals. "Currently, there is no measure, no common standards for feedback," he says. "So this is a provider-centric business that is only incidently about consumers."

Unlike other ratings systems, NAR's is designed not only to shed light on bad practices but also reinforce good things, according to Romito. "When agents know their brokers are seeing real-time data, it dramatically changes human behavior. Then, it becomes not 'because I say' but 'because consumers are saying so through an independent source.'"

Romito defends the decision to survey only participants in completed transactions, saying that agents' behavior is "fairly consistent," whether the deal closes or not, because they "have no way of knowing" in advance whether a transaction will lead to a successful outcome.

To date, the nearly year-old experiment has had mixed results among the 20 or so participating state realtors' associations and multiple listing services.

The Mainstreet Organization of Realtors (MORe) was one of the first to sign on to the Realtors' Excellence Program. But only about 3,000 of MORe's 14,500 member-agents have agreed to participate in the ratings aspect, according to the group's chief executive officer, Pam Krieter.

Krieter says the hot real estate market has hindered development of the ratings system. "It's a great time to launch something like this," she says. "But it's also a tough time because the market is good and agents' main focus is there."

The MORe executive said educating agents on the program's benefits is an ongoing effort. "It's going to take time to get this in place," she says. "But as we get the word out, more companies will see that this is the way to go."

Don Faught, president of the California Association of Realtors, NAR's largest state affiliate, is also "a big proponent" of the program. But, he concedes, there "hasn't been a whole lot of acceptance" among CAR's 155,000 members, either.

"It's been a struggle for us," says Faught, who works for Alain Pinel Realtors in Pleasanton, Calif. "Some (agents) like it and some don't. But whether they like it or not, this is the way people find out about you."

Meanwhile, there are any number of sites that purport to rate and/or review realty professionals, including Zillow, Redfin, ZipRealty, Homethinking, AgentRank and Yelp, among others.

All the hand-wringing aside, underwriting guidelines for prime mortgages haven't changed much since the housing bust. But what has changed are lenders and their automated underwriting tools.

In 2006, the minimum credit score for loans sold by primary lenders on the secondary market to Fannie Mae was 620 -- exactly where that requirement stands today. Likewise, the maximum debt-to-income ratio (DTI) is the same now as it was during the boom years, 38 percent, with exceptions up to 45 percent with compensating factors.

Still, it's much more difficult to qualify for the best rates and terms. And the reason for that, according to Credit Sesame, a website that helps borrowers make smart credit decisions, is that lenders are no longer pushing loans through at the limits.

"While the underlying requirements loaded into automated underwriting (AU) engines are not publicly disclosed, it is clear they were much more aggressive during the boom years," says Tony Wahl, director of operations at Credit Sesame.

"In the boom years, for example, it wasn't uncommon for Fannie Mae's AU engine to approve borrowers with a good credit score and a reasonable loan-to-value ratio (LTV) of up to 65 percent debt-to-income. Today, it tops out at 45 percent, even for the most qualified borrowers."

Another contributing factor: Lenders today run a far greater risk of being stuck with a loan they cannot peddle on the secondary market. Consequently, they are adhering much more closely to the rules.

Back then, an AU approval almost guaranteed your loan would be gobbled up by an investor without much risk of it being audited or repurchased. Today, mortgages are scrutinized up and down, even post-closing, and lenders are being required to buy back those loans for relatively minor reasons.

So, to offset that risk, lenders add on various "overlays" over and above the AU engines' rules. Those overlays vary from lender to lender, but Wahl says it is not uncommon for lenders to require minimum credit scores of 640 or even 660, and maximum DTI ratios of no more than 42 percent.

Many of the other underwriting rules haven't changed significantly, either. But again, the regulations inside the AU engine black boxes are tighter, and the willingness of lenders to accept waivers is lower. And that makes obtaining financing more challenging than it has ever been.

According to Credit Sesame, which allows people to shop for mortgages based on pricing, underwriting rules and lender-specific requirements, here is what you can expect today versus what was acceptable in 2006:

-- Bonus/commission income: Seven years ago, AU engines would ordinarily approve borrowers with reduced income documentation, such as a one-year history of commissions and bonuses. Today, two years are required.

-- Investment property: The maximum loan-to-value ratio on investment property has slipped from 85 percent to 80 percent. The change isn't terribly significant. But on top of that, mortgage insurance is no longer available on rental houses, so borrowers are limited to making down payments of at least 20 percent.

-- Cash-out refinance: Similarly, the max LTV ratio for cash-out refis has dipped from 85 percent to 80 percent. And mortgage insurance is no longer available for loans in which the down payment is less than 20 percent.

-- Reserves: In 2006, borrowers were required to have anywhere from zero to six months' worth of PITI (principal, interest, tax and insurance) in cash in reserve. Now, it can be up to 12 months' worth.

-- Gift funds: Gifts from family members or friends were allowed in 2006, even if the LTV was over 80 percent. And the same is true today, except that lenders are much more diligent in making borrowers prove the source of the gift money and that it really was a gift, not a loan.

-- Pay stubs: It used to be that pay stubs were required within 30 days of applying for the loan. Now it is within 30 days of closing.

-- IRS Form 4506T: In 2006, this form, which gives the lender permission to pull your tax returns directly from the Internal Revenue Service, was usually signed at closing but rarely executed. Now, most lenders want the form signed at application, and they use it to confirm your income as stated.

-- W2s: Often, the need to provide W2s as proof of income was waived in '06 if you signed a 4506T. Now, you need to provide two years' worth of this basic income verification tool, as well as a signed 4506T.

-- Employment: Verbal verification of employment used to be necessary within 30 days of closing. Now, such proof is required just before settlement.

"Today, most lenders are much more cautious in making sure no changes to a borrower's employment status have taken place since the initial application," says Wahl. "Most lenders will call employers immediately prior to closing."

Changes in technology now allow would-be borrowers to apply for financing whenever they like -- every day, 24-7. But many, it appears, are doing so during the workday, at a time, perhaps, when they should be working at their jobs rather than handling personal matters.

According to a MortgageMarvel.com analysis of some 650,000 online applications last year, people clicked the "send" button during all hours of the day and night. But activity started to pick up during the 10 a.m. hour (Central time) and didn't start to slow again until after 5 p.m.

If you assume that most people looking for a mortgage are employed, then they are obviously spending a good deal of their workday on their applications. But that's not necessarily a bad thing, says Rick Allen, CEO of the mortgage shopping service. Nor does it correlate that their work is suffering.

"I don't think it's a productivity issue," Allen ventures. "In today's work environment, people know how to balance work and personal matters. It's likely that people are doing regular work outside what we consider to be normal hours."

You might think borrowers would complete their loan applications on the weekend, but only about 15 percent of applications come in on Saturday and Sunday, according to MortgageMarvel. The rest come in during the week, with about 60 percent being submitted between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. The most activity is between the hours of 1 and 4 p.m.

Of course, a good deal of the information required hy lenders can't be gathered outside of regular business hours. While some workers are filling out their applications on the sly, savvy employers these days are granting their people a little more latitude in taking care of such personal matters. To compensate, employees are arriving earlier, staying longer and taking work home.

Looking to buy a house for your college student? Maybe a place of his own for your disabled son? Or perhaps a house nearby where your elderly parents can live out their remaining years?

Typically, financing a house in any one of these circumstances can be challenging. And the rules say you'll need as much as 20 percent down and the interest rate will be a half-point higher -- or more.

But Ted Rood, a senior loan consultant with Wintrust Mortgage in St. Louis, says it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

In researching the underwriting guidelines published by Fannie Mae, the big secondary market investor that sets the rules most lenders follow, Rood found an "obscure" exception that allows certain properties to be classified as owner-occupied even if the borrower doesn't reside in the place.

Fannie's guidelines state that parents wanting to provide housing for their college student children, or for physically handicapped or developmentally disabled adult children, can be considered to be owner-occupants if they meet the other lending program requirements.

Want to reach as many would-be buyers as possible? Price your home in round numbers, says realty broker David Rathgeber of Your Friend in Real Estate in Arlington, Va., and you'll get more exposure.

Since home searches are driven in a range of round numbers, you'll get a lot more eyeballs on your property and perhaps sell more quickly if your prices ends in 000, Rathgeber ventures.

Here's why: If your home is priced at $400,000, it will be found by anyone looking in the $350,000 to $400,000 range, the $375,000 to $825,000 range and the $400,000 to $450,000 range. But if it is priced at $399,000, buyers searching in the latter category will "be oblivious" to the fact that your house is on the market.

The Virginia agent says "almost all agents as well as individual buyers" hunt in round numbers. But if your place can't be priced at an even $100,000 increment, then make sure your asking price ends in three zeros. That, he promises, will give you an edge over your competition.