If you've been turned down by your lender for a government-backed program that would allow you to refinance your mortgage at a lower rate and keep the foreclosure wolves from your door, you might want to give it another try.

The federal agency that runs the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) says that as a result of unconscionable denial rates, it has tweaked the program several times to make it easier for underwater borrowers to qualify -- and more difficult for lenders and the companies that service their loans to reject them.

The program's improvements came to light recently when the office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program -- better known in Washington circles as SIGTARP -- revealed HAMP's abysmal performance record. It reported that 7 out of 10 borrowers who applied for assistance under HAMP were rejected.

That is, from 2009 through this April, 4 million of the 5.7 million beleaguered borrowers who sought help were turned down.

One of the Obama administration's key programs aimed at helping borrowers stave off foreclosure, HAMP is designed to provide deep and meaningful savings for homeowners tripped up by unaffordable increases in expenses or reductions in income.

The voluntary program calls on lenders and servicers to change the terms of loans to a level that is affordable for borrowers now, as well as sustainable over the long term. It provides clear and consistent loan modification guidelines that the entire mortgage industry can use.

But despite the fact that it includes monetary incentives for servicers, and for the investors who own the loans, the program's track record is pretty poor.

Many borrowers were rejected through no fault of their own. In its study, SIGTARP found that fully a quarter of all applicants were turned away because their applications were labeled "incomplete," even after servicers required them to resubmit the same paperwork several times. Often, servicers extended the time it took to make a final decision, outlasting borrowers who gave up in frustration.

Some 18 percent of owners dropped out of the running by failing to accept the servicer's loan-modication offer.

Another top reason for turning people down was that their incomes were deemed too high. But the report said the program has long been plagued by servicers' income miscalculations.

For borrowers who are still trying to save their homes, the SIGTARP report isn't as important as the response from the Treasury Department, which runs HAMP. Treasury said that things aren't as bad they seem, and they certainly aren't as bad as they once were.

And therein lies an underlying message to those who have been rejected: Give it another try.

"Treasury closely monitors the number of HAMP denials and has made changes to the program to simplify documentation requirements and expand eligibility criteria to assist more homeowners," said Mark McArdle, chief of Treasury's Homeownership Preservation Office.

Among the improvements: Documentation requirements have been simplified multiple times, most recently in a "streamlined" version that targets seriously delinquent borrowers who have yet to complete a modification application.

Also, eligibility requirements have been expanded to provide a more flexible debt-to-income ratio, and allow modifications on certain rental properties.

As a result, McArdle said, "We have seen significant improvement in servicers' compliance with program guidelines, including proper evaluations and denial decisions."

So, if you are still having trouble paying your mortgage and you meet the eligibility requirements -- chief among them is that your loan is owned, insured or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs or the Department of Agriculture -- you might look into giving HAMP a shot, even if you've been unsuccessful in the past. The program's life has been extended three times and now runs through Dec. 31, 2016.

Even if your loan is a conventional mortgage, not of the government-backed variety, you might want to consider asking your servicer for a modification.

As McArdle maintains, HAMP has not only helped more than 1.5 million homeowners modify their mortgages, it has also "indirectly assisted millions more by setting new standards for the mortgage industry that have led to more affordable and sustainable private modifications."

When the late-night television comedians joke about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- the two government-sponsored housing finance agencies that almost went belly-up during the housing crisis -- you know they have reached the public consciousness.

But there are two other federal housing programs hardly anyone knows about. One is Farmer Mac, a government-sponsored enterprise similar to Fannie and Freddie; the other is from the Department of Agriculture.

Both are aimed at rural homebuyers, but don't let that word fool you: "Rural" may be much closer than you think.

Among Farmer Mac's programs is one that targets buyers who want to move to the country and do a bit of farming, either full-scale or on the side. If you qualify, you are eligible for mortgages of up to $12 million (or $30 million on high-value properties of less than 1,000 acres).

There are no minimum or maximum acreage requirements. But if the property is less than five acres -- not a lot of ground in some suburban markets -- a minimum of $5,000 in annual gross sales of agriculture products must be documented. There is no such requirement for properties larger than five acres.

Known more formally as the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, Farmer Mac was created by Congress in 1988 to build a secondary market for agriculture real estate and rural housing mortgages, thereby increasing the availability of long-term credit for ranchers, farmers and rural homebuyers.

It doesn't make loans directly to borrowers. Rather, it purchases loans made by local lenders. And among the products it buys are part-time farm/residential mortgages made to so-called "hobby" farmers.

Eligible properties must be owner-occupied, single-family detached residences or second homes with enough acreage to support agricultural production. There are no geographic restrictions, but the property can't be just a house on a large lot, or off in the woods somewhere.

A variety of loans are available, including both fixed-rate and adjustable mortgages, with terms from seven to 30 years. For loans up to $5 million, the loan-to-value ratio cannot exceed 70 percent. Borrowers who want more than that will have to pony up 40 percent as a down payment.

To qualify, you must be a U.S. citizen or permanently admitted for U.S. residency.

To find a local lender that sells its mortgages to Farmer Mac, go to FarmerMac.com and fill out the pre-application form under the Borrowers tab. An employee will contact you to help you find a lender serving your area.

For borrowers who want to live in the country but don't want to be farmers, the Agriculture Department's Rural Housing Service (RHS) offers a variety of loans, grants and loan guarantees to build, buy or improve both single- and multi-family properties.

Actually, "rural" is something of a misnomer when it comes to the USDA, because eligible properties can be much closer to big-city markets than you might think. To find out if the property you are considering is eligible, go to eligibility.sc.egov.usda.gov and enter the address.

Under the RHS' Section 502 Direct Loan Program, low- and moderate-income borrowers are eligible for 100 percent mortgages with no money down. Applicants must have an adjusted income that is no greater than the low-income limit for their area, and be unable to obtain a mortgage from other sources.

Generally, houses can be no more than 1,800 square feet with a market value that does not exceed the applicable area loan amount.

The payback period for Section 502 mortgages is 33 years, though applicants with very low incomes who can't afford that extended loan term can stretch the loan out to 37 years.

Under the Guaranteed Loan Program, RHS provides a 90 percent loan note guarantee to approved lenders, to reduce the risk of extending 100 percent loans to eligible rural homebuyers and those who want to build, rehabilitate, improve or relocate a dwelling in an eligible rural area.

To find a list of approved lenders, go to rd.usda.gov/files/SFHGLDApprovedLenders.pdf.

There are limitations based on income and family size. But folks who have "moderate incomes" -- up to 115 percent of the U.S. median -- qualify. In the Chicago area, for example, the limit ranges from $87,400 for a one-person household to $115,350 for households with eight members. And in the Sarasota-North Port area on Florida's southwest coast, the ceiling ranges from $75,650 for single borrowers to $99,850 for eight-member households.

Guaranteed loans can be used for a new or existing residential property to be used as a permanent residence, occupied by the borrower. Closing costs and reasonable and customary expenses associated with the purchase may be included in the transaction.

The fact that television and radio pitchmen hawking real estate-related "get rich quick" schemes still fill the airways is not surprising. Not, at least, if you subscribe to the famous admonition about there being "a sucker born every minute."

But anyone considering handing over their hard-earned cash for classes, books and tapes that supposedly reveal the great secrets to using real estate to build instant wealth -- while exerting hardly any energy at all -- should ask themselves this:

If it is so darn easy to earn millions by following these get-rich preachers, why are they working so hard to turn you into a disciple?

The 2013 settlement between the Federal Trade Commission and financial guru Russ Dalbey should help answer that question.

Dalbey, who is now banned from the infomerical business, wasn't one of those buy-and-flip guys who dot the airwaves once Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel and the other late-night TV hosts sign off for the night. Instead, he was all about buying and selling promissory notes, most backed by real estate.

But like the majority of late-night pitchmen, whether they hawk real estate, privately held mortgages or tax liens, Dalbey did not earn millions from brokering notes, as he so proudly claimed.

Rather, according to a complaint filed by the FTC and Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, most of Dalbey's "note-related income" for the past 20 years came from "marketing and selling products and services purporting to teach consumers how to find and broker promissary notes."

Dalbey's pitch, "Winning in the Cash Flow Business," featured success stories of people claiming to have earned $1.2 million in 30 days, $79,000 in a few hours and $262,216 part-time.

But over the 15 years or so he was on the air, according to David Frankel, the FTC staff attorney on the case, only 296 of the 949,000-some people who purchased Dalbey's stuff actually made money, and just 129 made more than they'd spent on the courses.

People whom Dalbey swindled paid anywhere from $40 to $160 for his "Note Network" program. But once they were reeled in, they were hounded by high-pressure telemarketers to spend thousands more on boot camps, coaching sessions and lists of potential leads.

Dalbey was fined $330 million and forever prohibited from telemarketing, selling business opportunities and producing and distributing infomercials. But he escaped jail time.

Wade Cook didn't. The former taxi driver, who made most of his money selling books and tapes purporting to teach people how to find and broker privately held mortgages, was sentenced in 2007 to more than seven years in a federal penitentiary.

But both "gurus" fared better than their fellow con-man Don Lapre, who sold, among other things, a 36-page booklet explaining how to recover a Federal Housing Administration insurance refund after paying off a mortgage. Lapre killed himself in jail in 2011, while awaiting trial for bilking more than 220,000 victims out of nearly $52 million.

Lapre was charged with 41 counts of conspiracy, mail fraud, wire fraud and money laundering.

If this isn't enough to convince folks to keep a tight fist on their wallets, then they should check out the guru-rating Web page created by former real estate investor and newsletter publisher John T. Reed (johntreed.com). Reed sells a series of booklets on his site, and also offers what he says is "logical, well-researched, real-world, real estate investment advice."

That's the direct opposite of what many real estate investment "experts" have to sell.

The idea for the ratings list grew out of a 1990 article Reed wrote called "The Real Estate B.S. Artist Detection Checklist." The piece was intended to teach people how to recognize the charlatans on their own. But his readers wanted more -- his specific recommendation on every guru who has come down the pike. And there have been many.

Since 1979, he says, "there has been an endless parade of B.S. artists coming into the real estate investment advice field... It is an embarrassment to the good people in the business."

So, Reed started rating and reviewing dozens of industry authors, experts and seminar leaders -- giving readers his opinions of which ones are worth listening to. If you can't find a specific investor on the ratings page, which Reed admits he hasn't updated recently, check out his site's general guidelines for identifying a scam artist, and decide for yourself.

Sooner or later, the charlatans always meet the same fate as Dalbey and his fellow real estate robbers, says William Mencarow, another publisher-investor.

"The wheels of justice turn slowly," says Mencarow, "but eventually grind fine."