The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
l l★K Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas DALLAS, TEXAS 75265-5906 September 3, 2003 Notice 03-47 TO: The Chief Executive Officer of each financial institution and others concerned in the Eleventh Federal Reserve District SUBJECT Availability of Data on Small Business, Small Farm, and Community Development Lending; Availability of 2002 Data on Mortgage Lending Transactions DETAILS The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) has announced the availability of data on small business, small farm, and community development lending reported by commercial banks and thrifts. These institutions include independent commercial banks and savings associations with total assets of $250 million or more and institutions of any size if owned by a holding company with assets of $1 billion or more. The FFIEC has prepared a disclosure statement from the CRA 2002 data reported—in electronic form—for each reporting commercial bank and savings association. The FFIEC also has prepared aggregate disclosure statements of small business and small farm lending for each of the metropolitan areas and each of the non-metropolitan counties in the United States and its territories. These statements have been distributed to central depositories throughout the nation, where they are available for public inspection. Central depository locations and an order form for other available data can be found at the following Internet address: www.ffiec.gov/cra In addition, the FFIEC has announced the availability of data on 2002 mortgage lending transactions at 7,771 financial institutions covered by the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) in metropolitan areas throughout the nation. These data include disclosure statements for each financial institution, aggregate data for each metropolitan area, and nationwide summary statistics regarding lending patterns. For additional copies, bankers and others are encouraged to use one of the following toll-free numbers in contacting the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas: Dallas Office (800) 333-4460; El Paso Branch (800) 846-6858; Houston Branch Intrastate (800) 392-4162, Interstate (800) 221-0363; San Antonio Branch Intrastate (800) 292-5810. -2- The location of a central depository for a metropolitan area can be obtained by calling the FFIEC at (202) 872-7500. The FFIEC distributes the disclosure statements to institutions and central depositories in electronic form only. In addition, the FFIEC makes HMDA data available directly to the public in various formats, including magnetic tape, CD-ROM, and at the FFIEC’s web site at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. Some data are available in paper form (tables for 2002 showing key demographic information for metropolitan areas, for instance). An order form, which gives descriptions of the various reports, prices, and formats, is available at www.ffiec.gov/hmda/orderform.htm. Advance orders will be filled when the data become available. ATTACHMENT The FFIEC’s press releases, fact sheets, and order forms describing the various reports and formats available are attached. MORE INFORMATION For more information, please contact Eugene Coy, Banking Supervision Department, at (214) 922-6201. Paper copies of this notice or previous Federal Reserve Bank notices can be printed from our web site at www.dallasfed.org/banking/notices/index.html. Site Index What's New Search Disclaimer Privacy Policy Press Releases About the FFIEC Press Releases Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council Reports For Immediate Release Reporting Forms Handbooks & Catalogues Enforcement Actions and Orders On-line Information Systems Other FFIEC Sites Examiner Education Office Appraisal Subcommittee HMDA CRA Press Release July 31, 2003 The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) today announced the availability of data on small business, small farm, and community development lending reported by commercial banks and thrifts. The regulations that implement the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) generally require the reporting of data on these types of lending by independent commercial banks and savings associations having total assets of $250 million or more, and by commercial banks and savings associations of any size if owned by a holding company having assets of $1 billion or more. Analysis of Call Report and Thrift Financial Report data indicates that reporting institutions account for about 88 percent of the number of small business loans and about 32 percent of the number of small farm loans extended by all commercial banks and savings associations. The 2002 CRA data reflect originations and purchases of small business, small farm, and community development loans from 1,986 institutions, including 1,495 commercial banks and 491 savings associations. (See attached fact sheet and related tables.) Approximately 8 million small business loans, totaling $253 billion, and approximately 256,000 small farm loans, totaling $16 billion, were reported for 2002. The number of small business loans reported in 2002 increased by 24 percent from 2001; the total dollar amount of these loans increased by about 13 percent from 2001 to 2002. The number of small farm loans reported in 2002 increased by 9 percent from 2001; the total dollar amount of these loans increased by 13 percent. The small business and small farm lending data reported under the CRA regulations are more limited than the data reported on home mortgage lending under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). The CRA data include information on loans originated or purchased, not on applications that are denied by the institution or withdrawn by the applicant. The CRA data are not reported on an application-by-application basis; rather, the CRA data are aggregated into three loan-size categories and then reported at the census tract level. About 31 percent of the small business loans reported for 2002 were extended to borrowers with revenues of $1 million or less, down from 40 percent in 2001, and down sharply from a high point of 60 percent in 1999. The decrease in the share of lending to small firms since 1999 is primarily the result of a substantial increase in reported lines of credit, renewals of such lines with larger limits, and credit card lending to larger firms. The proportion of small farm loans made to borrowers with revenues of $1 million or less in 2002 was 88 percent, about the same percentage as in 2001. The vast majority of reported small business loans (93 percent) and small farm loans (82 percent) extended in 2002 were for amounts under $100,000. Small business loans were heavily concentrated in central city and suburban areas, as are both the U.S. population and U.S. businesses. Small farm loans were heavily concentrated in rural areas. The variation in small business lending among census tracts grouped into income categories generally parallels the distribution of the population and businesses among these categories. In lower-income areas, most small business loans are made in central city census tracts; in higher-income areas, small business loans are most frequently made in suburban census tracts. Most small farm loans are made in rural areas regardless of area income. A comparison of small business lending activity in low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income areas in 2002 with 2001 shows that the share of the total number of loans and of the dollar amount of lending in these areas remained about the same. In 2002, commercial banks and savings associations reported community development lending that totaled approximately $28 billion. The dollar amount of community development loans increased by about 13 percent from 2001 to 2002. The number of these loans is larger than in 2001, up about 17 percent to 30,554. A community development loan has as its primary purpose affordable housing for low- or moderate-income individuals, community services targeted to these individuals, activities that promote economic development by financing small businesses or small farms, or activities that revitalize or stabilize low- or moderate-income neighborhoods. Under CRA regulations, retail institutions do not report community development loans as small business or small farm loans, or as home mortgage loans under HMDA (except for multifamily dwelling loans reported under HMDA). The FFIEC has prepared a disclosure statement from the 2002 CRA data reported, in electronic form, for each reporting commercial bank and savings association. The FFIEC also has prepared aggregate disclosure statements of small business and small farm lending for each of the metropolitan areas and each of the non-metropolitan counties in the United States and its territories, and has distributed these statements to central depositories throughout the nation, where they are available for public inspection. The 2002 CRA data will be available on the FFIEC web site today (www.ffiec.gov/cra). An order form for CRA data and related items, with descriptions of the various reports and formats available, is attached to this release and is also available on the FFIEC web site. Central depository locations, and an order form for other data available from the FFIEC (including data on home mortgage loans reported under HMDA), can be found on the FFIEC web site. Attachments: Fact Sheet on 2002 Data (with tables) (Note: Tables are in PDF) CRA Data Order Form and Item Descriptions (PDF) Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision Site Index Search Disclaimer Privacy Policy About the FFIEC Reports - Findings from Analysis of Nationwide Summary Statistics for 2002 Community Reinvestment Act Data Fact Sheet (July 2003) Press Releases Tables are in Portable Document Format (PDF). Reports The following analysis of nationwide summary statistics is based on data compiled by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) for institutions reporting under Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations. What's New Reporting Forms Handbooks & Catalogues Enforcement Actions and Orders On-line Information Systems Other FFIEC Sites Examiner Education Office Appraisal Subcommittee HMDA CRA Background The CRA is intended to encourage federally insured commercial banks and savings associations to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered. The CRA regulations require larger commercial banks and savings associations to report data on their small business, small farm, and community development lending. The institutions subject to these requirements generally include independent institutions with total assets of $250 million or more and institutions of any size if owned by a holding company that has assets of $1 billion or more. Under the CRA regulations, small business loans are loans of $1 million or less; small farm loans are loans of $500,000 or less. The small business and small farm lending data, when coupled with information reported about the geographic locations that constitute each reporting institution's local CRA assessment area(s), make it possible to better evaluate the performance of reporting institutions under the CRA lending test.1 The small business and small farm lending data reported under the CRA regulations differ from the data reported on home mortgage lending under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) in several respects. Unlike the HMDA data, the CRA data include information only on loans originated or purchased, not on applications that are denied by the institution or withdrawn by the applicant. In addition, the CRA data do not include information about applicant income, sex, or racial or ethnic background, although the CRA data do indicate whether a loan is extended to a borrower with annual revenues of $1 million or less. Finally, the CRA data are not reported application-by-application, as HMDA data are, but rather are aggregated into three loan-size categories and then reported at the census tract level. CRA data are a valuable tool for many different types of analyses. At the same time, the analysis of CRA data poses challenges. For example, lending institutions are asked to report the geographic location of the small business or small farm receiving the loan. However, the borrower may have used those funds to support business activities in other locations. Thus, assessment of the data may categorize a loan by the characteristics of the reported geography (typically a census tract) even though the funds are used to support the activities of a firm's offices in a location with different characteristics. While CRA data provide information on extensions of credit in a geographic area, they do not indicate the amount or nature of the overall demand for credit there. Caution should be used in drawing conclusions from analyses using only CRA data, as differences in local loan volume may reflect differences in local demand, among other things. Indeed, CRA performance assessments by the supervisory agencies focus on evaluating the volume and distribution of lending in the context of local credit needs. General Description of the 2002 CRA Data A total of 1,986 lenders reported data on small business and small farm lending in 2002, including 1,495 commercial banks and 491 savings associations (table 1). Most of the reporting institutions (74 percent) had assets under $1 billion, including 13 percent that had assets under $250 million (derived from table 3). (As indicated above, independent institutions with assets under $250 million are not required to report these data.) Compared with 2001, the number of reporters has slightly increased (up 4 percent). Because the CRA data do not include the lending of all commercial banks and savings associations, the data do not fully represent all small business and small farm lending by these types of institutions. Nonetheless, covered institutions represent a significant portion of such lending, particularly to small businesses. Analysis of Call Report data on small loans to businesses and farms indicates that CRA reporters account for about 88 percent of the small business loans outstanding measured by number of loans and 77 percent measured by dollars and 32 percent of the small farm loans outstanding measured by number of loans and 38 percent measured by dollars extended by all commercial banks and savings associations (table 1). In the aggregate, about 8 million small business loans, totaling $253 billion, and about 256,000 small farm loans, totaling $16 billion, were reported for 2002 (table 2). Reported loans include both loans originated and loans purchased during 2002. Unlike home mortgage lending, a well developed secondary market for small business loans does not exist, and the CRA data reflect this.2 Most reported small business and small farm loans were originations; less than 1 percent of the loans of either type were reported as purchases from another institution (derived from table 2). The CRA data provide information about the size of small business and small farm loans. For small business loans, the maximum loan size reported is $1 million; for small farm loans the maximum is $500,000. In 2002, the average small business loan was approximately $33,500, down from $37,000 in 2001. The average small farm loan in 2002 was about $63,300, up from $61,000 in 2001 (derived from table 2). Measured by number of loans, 93 percent of the small business loans and 82 percent of the small farm loans were for amounts under $100,000 (table 2). Measured by dollars, the distribution differs: 33 percent of the small business loan dollars and 37 percent of the small farm loan dollars were extended through loans of less than $100,000 (table 2). The CRA data include information on how many of the reported loans were extended to businesses or farms with revenues of $1 million or less. Such firms fall within generally accepted definitions of a small business, although somewhat larger firms are also often categorized as being a small business or small farm. For 2002, 31 percent of the reported small business loans and 88 percent of the small farm loans (measured by number of loans) were extended to firms with revenues of $1 million or less (table 2). The data also show that, on average, loans to firms with revenues under $1 million are larger than loans to larger firms. For example, for 2002, the average business loan to small firms was about $47,800 while the average loan to larger businesses was roughly $27,100 (derived from table 2). This relationship is contrary to expectations and to relationships found in years prior to 2000 when small business loans to small firms were on average about two-thirds the size of loans to larger firms. The pattern found in the 2002 data (as well as in the 2001 data) reflects a substantial increase in the volume of credit card lending to larger businesses in the past few years. Such loans tend to be for relatively small amounts. Increased competition among credit card lenders may have led to the increase in credit card loans to larger businesses. Most of the reported small business loans (about 77 percent measured by number of loans and 92 percent measured by dollars) were either originated or purchased by commercial banks (data not shown). This preponderance of commercial banks in small business lending is consistent with data provided by other sources, including the Federal Reserve's 1987, 1993, and 1998 National Surveys of Small Business Finances, which show that commercial banks are the predominant source of credit for small businesses.3 Larger commercial banks and savings associations (those with assets of $1 billion or more) originated or purchased about 74 percent of the reported small business loans (table 3). These larger banks and savings associations represent a minority, however, of the institutions reporting such loans. No significant differences between commercial banks and savings associations were observed in this regard; larger institutions did the majority of small business lending within their institutional categories (data not shown). The overall pattern differs for small farm loans, where larger institutions accounted for about half (47 percent) of the loans. These patterns are little changed from previous years. Reconciling the Numbers The 2002 CRA data show a relatively large increase (about 24 percent) over the 2001 data in the total number of small business loans originated, with about 98 percent of the increase occurring in loans of $100,000 or less (derived from table 2). Two factors may explain why small business lending increased so much from 2001 to 2002. First, three institutions had very large increases in the number of reported small business loans, which accounted for most of the increase in small business lending.4 Second, some reporters were involved in mergers and acquisitions that brought previously uncovered institutions under the data reporting requirements. A new rule allowing institutions to report loan renewals as separate originations may account for some of the increased lending. Similar increases in small business lending were observed for reported data between 1999 and 2001, which appeared to be the consequence of a large increase in reported credit card activity, and the opening of lines of credit. The proportion of small business loans extended to smaller firms declined to 31 percent, down sharply from a high point of 60 percent in 1999. The decline in the share of lending to small firms since 1999 is primarily the result of a substantial increase in reported lines of credit, renewals of such lines with larger limits, and credit card lending to larger firms. In addition, the decline reflects a change in the data collection practices of some banks that no longer request revenue-size information from business customers and as a result, no longer report which, if any, small business loans are to small firms. The Geographic Distribution of Small Business and Small Farm Lending The availability of information about the geographic location of businesses and farms receiving credit provides an opportunity to examine the distribution of small business and small farm lending across areas grouped by their socio-demographic and economic characteristics. Information on the distribution of businesses and population provide some context within which to view these distributions. CRA performance assessments include an analysis of the distribution of small business and small farm loans (of all types) across census tracts grouped into four neighborhood income categories: low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income.5 Overall, the distribution of the number and the dollar amounts of small business loans across these categories parallels the distribution of population and businesses across these four income groups (tables 4.1 and 4.2).6 For example, low-income areas include about 4.9 percent of the population and about 4.5 percent of the businesses, and received about 3.7 percent of the number and about 4.7 percent of the total dollar amount of small business loans.7 The share of small business lending in low- and moderate-income areas remained about the same in 2002 as in 2001, measured both by total number of loans and total dollar amount. The same year-over-year pattern is observed for lending in middle- and upper-income areas. In the distribution of small business lending reported under the CRA across central city, suburban, and rural areas, small business loans are heavily concentrated in U.S. central city and suburban areas (about 83 percent of the number or dollar amount of all small business loans), as are the bulk of the U.S. population and the number of businesses (tables 4.1 and 4.2). In lower-income areas, most small business loans (about 89 percent) occur in central city census tracts; in higher-income areas, small business loans are most frequently made in suburban census tracts. Most small farm loans are made in rural areas regardless of area income (about 75 percent of the number of loans and 70 percent of the dollar amount of such lending) (tables 4.3 and 4.4). Community Development Lending In addition to information about small business and small farm lending, institutions covered by the CRA data reporting requirements also disclose the number and dollar amount of their community development loans. Among the 1,986 reporting institutions in 2002, about 62 percent extended community development loans (derived from table 5). For 2002, institutions reported 30,554 community development loans totaling $28 billion (table 5). The total number of reported community development loans is higher than in 2001, up about 17 percent measured by number of loans and 13 percent by dollars. The new rule allowing institutions to report loan renewals as separate loan originations may account for some of these increases. As in earlier years, on average, community development loans are much larger ($910,000) than the typical small business loan ($33,500) reported in the CRA data. Larger lenders (assets of $1 billion or more) extended the bulk of community development loans. Footnotes 1. The regulations that implement the CRA provide three performance tests for large retail institutions: a lending test, an investment test, and a service test. The lending test focuses primarily on the geographic distribution of lending, considering the proportion of loans extended within the institution's local community and the distribution of these loans among different types of borrowers and neighborhoods. 2. The one exception is for small business loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration. See "Report to Congress on Markets for Small Business and Commercial Mortgage Related Securities," Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (September 1996). 3.See Rebel A. Cole, John D. Wolken, and R. Louise Woodburn, "Bank and Nonbank Competition for Small Business Credit: Evidence from the 1987 and 1993 National Surveys of Business Finances," Federal Reserve Bulletin, vol. 82, no. 11 (November 1996), pp. 983-995; and Marianne P. Bitler, Alicia M. Robb, and John D. Wolken, "Financial Services Used by Small Businesses: Evidence from the 1998 Survey of Small Business Finances," Federal Reserve Bulletin, vol. 87, no. 4 (April 2001), pp. 183-206. 4. These three institutions reported increases in the number of small business loans of 207,000, 155,000, and 1,038,000 respectively in the loan size category under $100,000. Together, these additional 1.4 million loans accounted for just $10.2 billion out of the total of $253.2 billion for all reported small business loans. 5. For purposes of the regulations, a low-income census tract has a median family income that is less than 50 percent of the median family income for the broader area (either metropolitan area or non-metropolitan portion of a state); a moderate-income tract, 50 percent to less than 80 percent; a middle-income tract, 80 percent to less than 120 percent; and an upper-income tract, 120 percent or more. 6. Beginning with 1998 data, institutions filing CRA data were allowed to report that the census tract location of a firm or farm receiving a loan was unknown. For 2002, 6.4 percent of the reported small business loans by number and 1.7 percent by dollar amount included such a designation. 7. Data on the share of population across census tract income categories is derived from the 1990 Census of Population and Housing (most current available). Data on the share of businesses across census tract income categories is derived from information from Dun and Bradstreet files of businesses. Calculations exclude agricultural-related firms. 1. Small loans to businesses and farms, 1996-2002 Item 1996 19984 1997 1999 20014 2000 2002 Total business loans number.................................................. 2,424,966 2,560,795 2,736,389 3,287,974 5,110,001 6,094,606 7,556,999 dollar (thousands of dollars)................. 149,718,193 159,401,302 161,211,231 174,538,571 179,056,204 224,914,485 253,225,288 by number............................................. 55.9 50.0 54.5 60.2 41.7 40.0 31.0 by dollars............................................... 43.1 42.1 47.0 48.5 45.9 44.8 44.2 Percent to small firms1 Total farm loans number.................................................. 217,356 212,822 206,267 220,587 204,318 235,417 256,117 dollar (thousands of dollars)................. 10,480,989 11,192,400 11,373,691 12,302,881 11,634,880 14,330,467 16,222,070 by number............................................. 88.4 89.5 90.4 90.6 90.2 90.0 88.5 by dollars............................................... 81.4 81.3 83.0 83.7 83.8 83.6 83.0 by number of loans............................... 65.9 71.0 67.8 67.8 83.7 84.0 88.0 by amount of loans ............................... 67.5 69.4 69.4 72.4 75.6 75.0 76.9 by number of loans............................... 22.2 24.1 24.9 28.0 30.6 32.3 32.2 by amount of loans ............................... 27.9 28.4 30.1 34.1 37.5 38.2 38.1 less than 100......................................... 3.7 1.2 1.9 1.0 .5 .4 .1 100 to 249 ............................................ 19.7 6.5 5.5 1.4 .8 13.8 .5 250 to 999 ............................................ 16.1 15.7 20.3 15.9 18.8 13.2 25.1 1,000 or more....................................... 60.6 76.6 72.3 81.8 79.8 72.6 74.3 Total.............................................. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 less than 100......................................... 1.6 1.4 0.8 1.0 .6 1.0 .4 100 to 249 ............................................ 5.7 3.5 3.2 2.2 2.0 2.7 1.6 250 to 999 ............................................ 22.4 20.9 22.7 21.6 23.0 21.8 23.6 1,000 or more....................................... 70.3 74.2 73.3 75.2 74.4 74.5 74.4 Total.............................................. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Percent to small farms1 Activity of CRA reporters as a percentage of2 all small loans to businesses All small loans to farms Distribution of business loans by asset size of lender by number of loans (percent) by amount of loans (percent) 1. Continued Item 1996 19984 1997 1999 20014 2000 2002 Distribution of farm loans by asset size of lender by number of loans (percent) less than 100 ........................................ 9.8 6.4 4.9 4.9 2.2 1.2 1.0 100 to 249............................................ 14.2 10.4 8.2 6.6 4.8 3.4 2.5 250 to 999............................................ 34.5 37.4 38.7 37.7 46.7 42.7 49.1 1,000 or more....................................... 41.5 45.8 48.2 50.8 46.3 52.6 47.4 Total ............................................. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 less than 100 ........................................ 6.4 5.1 3.5 4.0 1.7 .9 .7 100 to 249............................................ 11.5 8.2 6.6 5.6 4.0 2.8 2.3 250 to 999............................................ 31.7 34.2 36.0 36.3 42.7 38.8 43.2 1,000 or more....................................... 50.4 52.5 53.9 54.1 51.5 57.5 53.8 Total ............................................. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 low........................................................ 4.7 4.6 4.3 3.6 3.6 4.0 3.7 moderate............................................... 15.9 16.0 15.5 14.6 14.6 15.2 15.2 middle................................................... 49.4 49.1 49.5 50.1 50.2 50.1 50.5 upper .................................................... 29.5 29.8 30.3 31.2 31.2 30.3 30.3 income not reported ............................. .5 .5 .5 .4 .4 .4 .4 Total ............................................. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 low........................................................ 5.6 5.4 5.2 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.7 moderate............................................... 16.0 16.0 15.7 15.5 15.4 15.2 15.2 middle................................................... 46.8 46.5 46.8 47.1 47.6 47.6 47.9 upper .................................................... 30.9 31.4 31.6 31.7 31.5 31.7 31.7 by amount of loans (percent) Distribution of business loans by income of census tract3 by number of loans by amount of loans income not reported ............................. .7 .7 .7 .7 .5 .6 .6 Total ............................................. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 commercial banks ................................ 1583 1421 1576 1450 1471 1443 1495 savings associations ............................. 496 475 290 461 470 469 491 Total ............................................. 2079 1896 1866 1911 1941 1912 1986 Memo: Number of reporters 1. Business and farms with revenues of $1 million or less. 2. Percentages reflect the ratio of activity by CRA reporters to activity by all lenders. Calculations based on information reported in the June Call Reports for commercial banks and the Thrift Financial Reports for savings associations. 3. low income: census tract median family income less than 50 percent of metropolitan area median family income or nonmetropolitan portion of state median family income; moderate income: 50-79 percent; middle income: 80-120 percent; upper income: 120 percent or more. Excludes loans where census tract or block number area was not reported. 4. Revised to reflect correction of reported data. Source. FFIEC 2. Originations and purchases of small loans to businesses and farms, by size of loan, 2002 MEMO Loans to firms with revenues of $1 million or less Size of loan (dollars) Type of borrower and loan All loans 100,000 or less Total Percent 100,001 to 250,000 Total Percent More than 250,000 Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent Number of Loans Business Originations Purchases Total Farm 6,997,946 56,600 7,054,546 93.4 92.0 93.4 260,671 2,080 262,751 3.5 3.4 3.5 236,890 2,812 239,702 3.2 4.6 3.2 7,495,507 61,492 7,556,999 100 100 100 2,316,700 25,427 2,342,127 30.9 41.4 31.0 Originations Purchases Total All 209,228 1,094 210,322 82.2 72.3 82.1 32,321 282 32,603 12.7 18.6 12.7 13,054 138 13,192 5.1 9.1 5.2 254,603 1,514 256,117 100 100 100 225,443 1,123 226,566 88.5 74.2 88.5 Originations Purchases Total 7,207,174 57,694 7,264,868 93.0 91.6 93.0 292,992 2,362 295,354 3.8 3.7 3.8 249,944 2,950 252,894 3.2 4.7 3.2 7,750,110 63,006 7,813,116 100 100 100 2,542,143 26,550 2,568,693 32.8 42.1 32.9 Amount of loans (thousands of dollars) Business Originations Purchases Total Farm 81,000,253 1,246,279 82,246,532 Originations Purchases Total All 5,953,980 36,592 5,990,572 Originations Purchases Total 86,954,233 1,282,871 88,237,104 32.4 45,430,559 39.8 354,218 32.5 45,784,777 18.2 123,661,681 11.3 1,532,298 18.1 125,193,979 49.4 250,092,493 48.9 3,132,795 49.4 253,225,288 100 111,074,212 100 803,644 100 111,877,856 44.4 25.7 44.2 37.0 27.1 36.9 33.5 35.1 33.5 4,741,249 50,857 4,792,106 29.5 16,087,241 37.7 134,829 29.5 16,222,070 100 13,371,430 100 87,155 100 13,458,585 83.1 64.6 83.0 19.1 128,402,930 12.3 1,583,155 19.0 129,986,085 48.2 266,179,734 48.4 3,267,624 48.2 269,447,358 100 124,445,642 100 890,799 100 125,336,441 46.8 27.3 46.5 5,392,012 47,380 5,439,392 32.7 50,822,571 39.3 401,598 32.7 51,224,169 3. Originations and purchases of small loans to businesses and farms, grouped by type of borrower and loan and distributed by size of lending institution, 2002 Institutions, by asset size (millions of dollars) Type of borrower and loan Less than 100 Total 100 to 249 Percent Total All institutions 250 to 999 Percent Total 1,000 or more Percent Total Percent Total Percent Number of loans Business Originations 10,374 0.1 35,707 0.5 1,879,557 25.1 5,569,869 74.3 7,495,507 100 228 0.4 1,249 2.0 18,664 30.4 41,351 67.2 61,492 100 10,602 0.1 36,956 0.5 1,898,221 25.1 5,611,220 74.3 7,556,999 100 2,629 1.0 6,386 2.5 124,722 49.0 120,866 47.5 254,603 100 10 0.7 0 0.0 941 62.2 563 37.2 1,514 100 2,639 1.0 6,386 2.5 125,663 49.1 121,429 47.4 256,117 100 Originations 13,003 0.2 42,093 0.5 2,004,279 25.9 5,690,735 73.4 7,750,110 100 Purchases 238 13,241 0.4 0.2 1,249 43,342 2.0 0.6 19,605 2,023,884 31.1 25.9 41,914 5,732,649 66.5 73.4 63,006 7,813,116 100 100 23.6 186,170,353 74.4 250,092,493 100 21.2 68.8 3,132,795 100 23.6 188,325,207 74.4 253,225,288 100 Purchases Total Farm Originations Purchases Total All Total Amount of loans (thousands of dollars) Business Originations 975,591 0.4 3,802,407 1.5 59,144,142 74,261 2.4 240,555 7.7 663,125 1,049,852 0.4 4,042,962 1.6 59,807,267 113,254 0.7 365,441 2.3 6,909,847 43.0 8,698,699 54.1 16,087,241 100 1,705 1.3 0 0.0 105,411 78.2 27,713 20.6 134,829 100 114,959 0.7 365,441 2.3 7,015,258 43.2 8,726,412 53.8 16,222,070 100 Originations 1,088,845 0.4 4,167,848 1.6 66,053,989 24.8 194,869,052 73.2 266,179,734 100 Purchases 75,966 1,164,811 2.3 0.4 240,555 4,408,403 7.4 1.6 768,536 66,822,525 23.5 2,182,567 24.8 197,051,619 66.8 3,267,624 73.1 269,447,358 100 100 Purchases Total 2,154,854 Farm Originations Purchases Total All Total MEMO Number of institutions reporting 95 165 1,218 508 1,986 Number of institutions extending loans 85 155 1,142 455 1,837 4.1. Number of small loans to businesses, grouped by neighborhood characteristics and distributed by amount of lending, 2002 MEMO Distribution of U.S. businesess and population (percent) Characteristics of neighborhood 100,000 or less BusiPopulation nesses MEMO Number of loans to firms with revenues of $1 million or less Number of loans, by size category (dollars) MEMO Percent of Percent small business loans 100,001 to 250,000 Percent MEMO Percent of small business loans More than 250,000 to 1 million MEMO Percent of Percent small business loans All Total Percent MEMO Percent of small business loans Total MEMO Percent of small business loans Location Central City 37.4 37.1 92.3 37.2 3.9 39.5 3.8 42.0 2,646,505 100 37.4 816,533 30.9 Suburban 44.2 42.7 93.5 45.8 3.3 41.1 3.2 43.1 3,222,444 100 45.5 952,171 29.5 Rural 18.4 20.2 92.8 17.0 4.2 19.5 2.9 15.0 1,207,327 100 17.1 481,321 39.9 100.0 100.0 93.0 100.0 3.7 100.0 3.4 100.0 7,076,276 100 100.0 2,250,025 31.8 Subtotal Tract not known Total 0.0 0.0 99.2 6.8 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.8 480,723 100 6.4 92,102 19.2 100.0 100.0 93.4 --- 3.5 --- 3.2 - - - 7,556,999 100 - - - 2,342,127 31.0 Area Income Low (less than 50) Central City 4.0 4.3 90.7 3.3 4.5 4.1 4.8 4.7 236,089 100 3.3 67,912 28.8 Suburban 0.3 0.4 93.6 0.3 3.2 0.3 3.2 0.3 22,663 100 0.3 5,503 24.3 Rural 0.1 0.2 92.6 0.1 4.4 0.1 3.0 0.1 6,399 100 0.1 2,679 41.9 Total 4.5 4.9 91.0 3.7 4.4 4.5 4.6 5.1 265,151 100 3.7 76,094 28.7 Moderate (50 to 79) Central City 8.7 9.8 92.4 8.2 3.8 8.6 3.8 9.3 585,494 100 8.3 164,525 28.1 Suburban 5.2 5.9 93.8 5.1 3.1 4.3 3.1 4.6 358,734 100 5.1 101,049 28.2 Rural 2.3 2.7 93.6 1.8 3.7 1.8 2.6 1.4 128,452 100 1.8 49,518 38.5 Total 16.2 18.5 93.0 15.2 3.6 14.7 3.4 15.4 1,072,680 100 15.2 315,092 29.4 Middle (80 to 119) Central City 13.8 14.8 92.8 14.3 3.7 14.2 3.5 14.9 1,009,887 100 14.3 310,296 30.7 Suburban 23.6 24.4 93.6 24.7 3.3 22.3 3.1 22.3 1,738,454 100 24.6 515,138 29.6 Rural 12.6 14.0 93.2 11.6 4.1 12.8 2.8 821,643 100 11.6 328,127 39.9 Total 50.0 53.2 93.3 50.6 3.6 49.3 3.1 46.8 3,569,984 100 50.5 1,153,561 32.3 10.5 8.1 92.2 11.1 4.0 12.2 3.7 12.5 793,040 100 11.2 267,518 33.7 15.1 12.0 93.3 15.6 3.3 14.1 3.4 15.8 1,099,996 100 15.5 330,086 30.0 Rural 3.3 3.3 91.4 3.5 4.9 4.7 3.7 249,419 100 3.5 100,231 40.2 Total 28.9 23.3 92.7 30.2 3.8 31.0 3.6 32.1 2,142,455 100 30.3 697,835 32.6 Upper (120 or more) Central City Suburban Income not reported Central City 9.6 3.9 0.4 0.1 89.6 0.3 5.0 0.4 5.4 0.5 21,995 100 0.3 6,282 28.6 Suburban 0.0 0.1 94.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 3.7 0.0 2,597 100 0.0 395 15.2 Rural 0.0 0.0 82.4 0.0 9.2 0.0 8.4 0.1 1,414 100 0.0 766 54.2 Total 0.4 0.2 89.6 0.4 5.0 0.5 5.4 0.6 26,006 100 0.4 7,443 28.6 100.0 100.0 93.0 100.0 3.7 100.0 3.4 100.0 7,076,276 100 100.0 2,250,025 31.8 0.0 0.0 99.2 6.8 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.8 480,723 100 6.4 92,102 19.2 100.0 100.0 93.4 --- 3.5 --- 3.2 - - - 7,556,999 100 - - - 2,342,127 31.0 Subtotal Tract not known Total Memo: Number of loans Subtotal 6,577,868 Number of businesses (millions) Population (millions) 16.6 252.2 2,034 2,011 7,054,546 Total 260,717 476,678 Tracts not known 237,691 262,751 239,702 4.2. Amount of small loans to businesses, grouped by neighborhood characteristics and distributed by amount of lending, 2002 MEMO Amount of loans to firms with revenues of $1 million or less Amount of loans (thousands of dollars) 100,000 or less Characteristics of neighborhood Percent 100,001 to 250,000 MEMO Percent of small business loans Percent MEMO Percent of small business loans More than 250,000 to 1 million MEMO Percent of small business loans Percent All Total Percent MEMO Percent of small business loans Total MEMO Percent of small business loans Location Central City Suburban Rural Subtotal 29.8 32.3 35.7 31.9 38.0 43.6 18.4 100.0 17.9 17.5 20.9 18.3 39.8 41.3 18.8 100.0 52.2 50.2 43.3 49.9 42.4 43.3 14.3 100.0 100,877,837 107,013,534 40,911,716 248,803,087 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 43.0 16.4 100.0 42,547,553 45,157,803 23,182,849 110,888,205 42.2 42.2 56.7 44.6 Tract not known Total 67.3 32.5 3.6 --- 8.0 18.1 0.8 --- 24.8 49.4 0.9 --- 4,422,201 253,225,288 100.0 100.0 1.7 --- 989,651 111,877,856 22.4 44.2 26.0 31.8 35.7 26.6 3.5 0.3 0.1 3.9 17.8 17.2 21.3 17.8 4.2 0.3 0.1 4.6 56.2 51.0 43.0 55.6 4.8 0.3 0.1 5.2 10,666,801 756,379 222,236 11,645,416 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4.3 0.3 0.1 4.7 3,866,713 251,813 132,404 4,250,930 36.2 33.3 59.6 36.5 29.4 32.6 37.3 31.2 8.2 4.8 1.9 14.9 17.7 17.1 20.2 17.8 8.7 4.4 1.8 14.8 52.9 50.3 42.5 51.0 9.5 4.7 1.4 15.5 22,231,281 11,567,743 4,016,689 37,815,713 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 8.9 4.6 1.6 15.2 8,411,369 4,585,103 2,173,977 15,170,449 37.8 39.6 54.1 40.1 30.6 32.7 36.9 33.0 13.9 23.2 12.5 49.6 17.9 18.0 20.9 18.6 14.2 22.3 12.3 48.9 51.5 49.2 42.1 48.3 15.0 22.3 9.1 46.4 36,132,655 56,269,192 26,723,201 119,125,048 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 14.5 22.6 10.7 47.9 15,523,047 23,963,027 14,972,469 54,458,543 43.0 42.6 56.0 45.7 30.8 31.5 31.9 31.3 11.9 15.2 4.0 31.1 18.2 17.0 21.2 18.0 12.3 14.3 4.6 31.2 51.0 51.5 46.9 50.7 12.6 15.9 3.7 32.2 30,668,118 38,330,821 9,837,149 78,836,088 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 12.3 15.4 4.0 31.7 14,415,745 16,331,805 5,861,073 36,608,623 47.0 42.6 59.6 46.4 Central City Suburban Rural Total 26.2 30.7 24.9 26.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 17.0 11.8 19.4 16.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 56.8 57.5 55.7 56.7 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.6 1,178,982 89,399 112,441 1,380,822 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.6 330,679 26,055 42,926 399,660 28.0 29.1 38.2 28.9 Subtotal 31.9 100.0 18.3 100.0 49.9 100.0 248,803,087 100.0 100.0 110,888,205 44.6 Tract not known Total 67.3 32.5 3.6 --- 8.0 18.1 0.8 --- 24.8 49.4 0.9 --- 4,422,201 253,225,288 100.0 100.0 1.7 --- 989,651 111,877,856 22.4 44.2 Area Income Low (less than 50) Central City Suburban Rural Total Moderate (50 to 79) Central City Suburban Rural Total Middle (80 to 119) Central City Suburban Rural Total Upper (120 or more) Central City Suburban Rural Total Income not reported Memo: Amount of loans Subtotal Tracts not known Total 79,270,860 45,433,083 2,975,672 351,694 124,099,144 1,094,835 82,246,532 45,784,777 125,193,979 4.3. Number of small loans to farms, grouped by neighborhood characteristics and distributed by amount of lending, 2002 MEMO Share of U.S. population (percent) Characteristics of neighborhood 100,000 or less Population MEMO Number of loans to farms with revenues of $1 million or less Number of loans, by size category (dollars) MEMO Percent of Percent small farm loans 100,001 to 250,000 MEMO Percent of small farm loans Percent More than 250,000 to 1 million MEMO Percent of Percent small farm loans All Total Percent MEMO Percent of small farm loans MEMO Percent of small farm loans Total Location Central City 37.1 76.0 5.7 15.6 7.5 8.4 9.9 15,461 100 6.1 12,240 79.2 Suburban 42.7 78.2 17.8 14.8 21.6 7.0 25.2 47,152 100 18.7 39,977 84.8 Rural 20.2 83.5 76.5 12.1 71.0 4.4 64.9 190,119 100 75.2 172,380 90.7 100.0 82.0 100.0 12.8 100.0 5.2 100.0 252,732 100 100.0 224,597 88.9 Subtotal Tract not known Total 0.0 87.9 1.4 6.9 0.7 5.2 1.3 3,385 100 1.3 1,969 58.2 100.0 82.1 --- 12.7 --- 5.2 --- 256,117 100 --- 226,566 88.5 Area Income Low (less than 50) Central City 4.3 68.8 0.1 15.6 0.2 15.6 0.4 321 100 0.1 195 60.7 Suburban 0.4 75.6 0.0 12.2 0.0 12.2 0.1 123 100 0.0 95 77.2 Rural 0.2 87.9 0.2 8.5 0.1 3.7 0.1 461 100 0.2 432 93.7 Total 4.9 79.4 0.3 11.5 0.3 9.1 0.6 905 100 0.4 722 79.8 Moderate (50 to 79) Central City 9.8 75.5 0.5 14.9 0.6 9.7 1.0 1,345 100 0.5 892 66.3 Suburban 5.9 79.3 2.6 13.0 2.8 7.7 4.0 6,885 100 2.7 5,854 85.0 Rural 2.7 83.8 7.8 11.3 6.7 4.9 7.3 19,346 100 7.7 17,640 91.2 Total 18.5 82.3 10.9 11.9 10.1 5.8 12.3 27,576 100 10.9 24,386 88.4 Middle (80 to 119) Central City 14.8 77.6 3.4 14.8 4.1 7.6 5.3 9,019 100 3.6 7,472 82.8 Suburban 24.4 78.4 13.8 15.0 16.9 6.6 18.5 36,512 100 14.4 31,440 86.1 Rural 14.0 83.6 61.6 12.1 57.1 4.3 50.9 152,764 100 60.4 138,692 90.8 Total 53.2 82.3 78.8 12.7 78.1 4.9 74.7 198,295 100 78.5 177,604 89.6 Upper (120 or more) Central City 8.1 73.6 1.7 17.4 2.6 9.0 3.3 4,752 100 1.9 3,666 77.1 12.0 74.6 1.3 16.5 1.9 8.9 2.5 3,625 100 1.4 2,584 71.3 Rural 3.3 82.2 7.0 13.0 7.0 4.8 6.5 17,536 100 6.9 15,604 89.0 Total 23.3 79.5 9.9 14.3 11.4 6.2 12.3 25,913 100 10.3 21,854 84.3 62.5 Suburban Income not reported Central City 0.1 75.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 12.5 0.0 24 100 0.0 15 Suburban 0.1 57.1 0.0 28.6 0.0 14.3 0.0 7 100 0.0 4 57.1 Rural 0.0 91.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 12 100 0.0 12 100.0 Total 0.2 76.7 0.0 11.6 0.0 11.6 0.0 43 100 0.0 31 72.1 100.0 82.0 100.0 12.8 100.0 5.2 100.0 252,732 100 100.0 224,597 88.9 0.0 87.9 1.4 6.9 0.7 5.2 1.3 3,385 100 1.3 1,969 58.2 100.0 82.1 --- 12.7 --- 5.2 --- 256,117 100 --- 226,566 88.5 Subtotal Tract not known Total Memo: Number of loans Subtotal 207,347 Population (millions) 252.2 235 175 210,322 Total 32,368 2,975 Tracts not known 13,017 32,603 13,192 4.4. Amount of small loans to farms, grouped by neighborhood characteristics and distributed by amount of lending, 2002 MEMO Amount of loans to farms with revenues of $1 million or less Amount of loans (thousands of dollars) 100,000 or less Characteristics of neighborhood Percent 100,001 to 250,000 MEMO Percent of small farm loans Percent MEMO Percent of small farm loans More than 250,000 to 1 million MEMO Percent of small farm loans Percent All Total Percent MEMO Percent of small farm loans Total MEMO Percent of small farm loans Location Central City Suburban Rural Subtotal 29.9 31.9 39.3 36.9 6.5 18.8 74.6 100.0 32.4 33.7 33.7 33.6 7.7 21.9 70.3 100.0 37.6 34.4 27.0 29.4 10.3 25.5 64.2 100.0 1,289,981 3,506,460 11,261,455 16,057,896 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 8.0 21.8 70.1 100.0 926,259 2,664,199 9,751,394 13,341,852 71.8 76.0 86.6 83.1 Tract not known Total 35.3 36.9 1.0 --- 25.3 33.5 0.8 --- 39.4 29.5 1.3 --- 164,174 16,222,070 100.0 100.0 1.0 --- 116,733 13,458,585 71.1 83.0 21.3 25.3 40.0 27.8 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 24.3 23.3 31.0 26.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 54.4 51.4 29.0 46.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.7 36,489 11,177 21,534 69,200 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 17,824 7,105 18,053 42,982 48.8 63.6 83.8 62.1 27.3 30.2 37.6 34.8 0.5 2.6 7.1 10.2 30.4 30.4 32.3 31.7 0.7 2.8 6.7 10.2 42.3 39.4 30.0 33.6 1.0 4.2 7.2 12.4 116,341 501,936 1,126,754 1,745,031 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.7 3.1 7.0 10.9 71,377 371,862 967,259 1,410,498 61.4 74.1 85.8 80.8 31.7 32.7 39.7 37.7 3.8 14.8 60.3 78.9 32.3 34.5 33.8 33.9 4.2 17.1 56.4 77.8 36.1 32.8 26.5 28.4 5.4 18.6 50.4 74.5 710,047 2,681,366 9,009,929 12,401,342 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4.4 16.7 56.1 77.2 530,113 2,082,017 7,821,193 10,433,323 74.7 77.6 86.8 84.1 28.5 27.8 37.8 34.0 2.0 1.5 7.0 10.5 34.0 33.0 34.4 34.0 2.7 1.9 7.0 11.6 37.5 39.2 27.8 32.0 3.4 2.6 6.5 12.4 424,754 311,037 1,102,675 1,838,466 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 2.6 1.9 6.9 11.4 305,326 202,794 944,326 1,452,446 71.9 65.2 85.6 79.0 Central City Suburban Rural Total 36.8 4.7 50.4 30.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.8 42.4 0.0 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.4 53.0 49.6 45.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,350 944 563 3,857 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,619 421 563 2,603 68.9 44.6 100.0 67.5 Subtotal 36.9 100.0 33.6 100.0 29.4 100.0 16,057,896 100.0 100.0 13,341,852 83.1 Tract not known Total 35.3 36.9 1.0 --- 25.3 33.5 0.8 --- 39.4 29.5 1.3 --- 164,174 16,222,070 100.0 100.0 1.0 --- 116,733 13,458,585 71.1 83.0 Area Income Low (less than 50) Central City Suburban Rural Total Moderate (50 to 79) Central City Suburban Rural Total Middle (80 to 119) Central City Suburban Rural Total Upper (120 or more) Central City Suburban Rural Total Income not reported Memo: Amount of loans Subtotal Tracts not known Total 5,932,574 5,397,893 57,998 41,499 4,727,429 64,677 5,990,572 5,439,392 4,792,106 5. Community development lending, 2002 Number of loans Asset size of lender (millions of dollars) Total Percent Amount of loans (thousands of dollars) Total Percent MEMO: CRA reporters Number Percent Community development loans Number extending Percent extending 27 2.2 Institution assets Less than 100 111 0.4 138,430 0.5 95 4.8 100 to 249 571 1.9 233,928 0.8 165 8.3 70 5.6 250 to 999 8,718 28.5 3,747,971 13.5 1,218 61.3 723 58.4 1000 or more 21,154 69.2 23,689,850 85.2 508 25.6 419 33.8 All 30,554 100.0 27,810,179 100.0 1,986 100.0 1,239 100.0 396 1.3 913,524 3.3 ... ... 30 2.4 MEMO: Lending by all affiliates FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL CRA DATA ORDER FORM (PAYMENT INFORMATION) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: __________________ Order Form Received at FRB: Order Shipped by FRB: Please Print Legibly CONTACT NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ ORGANIZATION: ______________________________________________________________________________ ADDRESS: _____________________________________________________________________________________ CITY/STATE/ZIP: _______________________________________________________________________________ TELEPHONE: Check if: - - EXT. FAX: Profit Non-Profit - - _______ Organization Sector: Financial Institution Government Agency Media Public/Other SHIPMENT INFORMATION (check appropriate method): Please ship the completed order at my expense using my overnight carrier listed below* Carrier Name _______________________ Account Number /__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/ Fourth class via United States Postal Service at no charge. PAYMENT INFORMATION (check appropriate method): ~Advance payment required via check, Money Order, Visa, or MasterCard. Check Please make checks payable to: FFIEC Money Order Mail to: Federal Reserve Board Attn: CRA/HMDA Data Request 20th & Constitution Avenue, N.W. MS N502 Washington, DC 20551-0001* Phone: 202-452-2016 Fax: 202-452-6497** *Sending via overnight carrier will assist with the expedition of your order. **ONLY credit payments (VISA or MasterCard) or no charge items may be sent by fax. Visa Card Number /__/__/__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ MasterCard Expiration Date (mm/ccyy) /__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ Signature (required when paying by credit card) _________________________________________ Date ___________ ~THE PAYMENT INFORMATION PAGE AND PAGES THAT HAVE THE REQUESTED ITEM(S) MUST BE SENT WITH YOUR PAYMENT. The omission of either will DELAY your order. 1 July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL CRA DATA ORDER FORM (CRA ITEMS) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ________ SELECTION LIST There is an additional charge for each year, MA/non-MA, and/or institution requested (see attached item descriptions) QTY UNIT COST TOTAL $ 10.00 $ $ 10.00 CRA Aggregate and Disclosure Reports on CD-ROM (Item #401) $ Indicate year(s): ______, ______ Note: Electronic item. Not available for years prior to 1996. CRA Disclosure Statement (Item #402) Indicate year(s): ______, ______ (Specify Respondent ID selections in ascending order; use back of form if additional space is required.) Indicate Institution Name: Respondent/Agency ID and Zip Code: Institution Name: __________________________ /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/-/_/ Zip Code: /_/_/_/_/_/ Institution Name: __________________________ /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/-/_/ Zip Code: /_/_/_/_/_/ Note: Hardcopy item. Not available for years prior to 1996. Cost of hardcopy report by institution is $10 per year/institution. CRA Aggregate Report (Item #403) $ 10.00 $ $ 10.00 $ Indicate year(s): ______, ______ For MAs: _____, _____, _____, _____, _____, _____ For non-MA of state(s) (provide state abbreviation): _____, _____ Note: Hardcopy item. Not available for years prior to 1996. Cost of hardcopy report by MA is $10 per year/MA; by non-MA is $10 per year/state. CRA 1996 Export Data on CD-ROM (Item #404) Note: Electronic item. Only available for 1996 data; these export data are included on the Aggregate Reports and Disclosure Statements CD-ROM (Item #401) beginning with 1997 data. GRAND TOTAL/CRA ITEMS 2 $ July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL CRA DATA ORDER FORM ITEM DESCRIPTIONS • Unless otherwise specified, reports using CRA data are available beginning with 1996. CRA data generally become available by August of the year following the reporting year, and data through calendar year 2002 are now available. Please refer to the CRA Assistance Line at (202) 872-7584, email at CRAHELP@FRB.GOV, or Internet at www.ffiec.gov/cra for the latest release of these reports. • There is an additional charge for each year, MA/non-MA, and/or institution requested. • Charges for duplicate requests apply. CRA Aggregate Report: This report aggregates the business and farm lending information reported within an MA or statewide non-MA. For MA reports, enter the MA number for each MA desired in the space provided. For statewide non-MAs, enter the name of the state in the space provided. The statewide non-MA aggregate report is unique to CRA; it does not have a HMDA counterpart. This report aggregates the data for all counties in a selected state that are not part of an MA. For example, Nebraska has three counties that are part of two MAs: Lincoln and Omaha. Data for the other eighty-six counties in Nebraska are shown in the statewide non-metropolitan aggregate report for Nebraska. The Aggregate Reports are distributed on hardcopy at a cost of $10 for each MA/non-MA/year requested. (Item #403) For an electronic version, see Item #401 below. For 1996 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/cra. CRA Disclosure Statement: The Disclosure Statement summarizes business and farm lending information from data that are prepared yearly by individual institutions. The Disclosure Statement is available in hardcopy at a cost of $10.00 for each institution/year requested. (Item #402) For an electronic version, see Item #401 below. For 1996 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/cra. CRA Aggregate and Disclosure Reports on CD-ROM: The Aggregate Reports (by MA and non-MAs) and individual institution Disclosure Statements are available on CD-ROM at a cost of $10.00 for the entire nation. (Item #401) The CRA Aggregate and Disclosure Software allows you to access reports at the MA, state, county, and institution (for disclosures only) level, print reports, and/or export the data for selected reports. Beginning with 1997, the three flat files described in the “1996 Export Data on CD-ROM” (Item #404) below are included on the Aggregate and Disclosure Reports CD-ROM at no additional cost. CRA 1996 Export Data on CD-ROM: The CD-ROM contains three flat files, which in combination, represent all the 1996 CRA Aggregate & Disclosure report data. This CD is best used for analyzing large portions of the CRA data. Detailed information regarding each of the three files is as follows: 1) TS.DAT contains all the transmittal sheet information for the CRA reporting institutions. (The information on this file is viewable but not exportable from the Aggregate & Disclosure CD.) 2) AGGR_ALL.DAT contains all the MA Aggregate report data. 3) DISC_ALL.DAT contains all the individual Disclosure Statement report data. The Transmittal Sheet file (TS.DAT) and CRA data files (AGGR_ALL.DAT and DISC_ALL.DAT) are ASCII files with fixed record lengths. NOTE: The file specifications for each of the individual Aggregate & Disclosure tables have been included in a write file on the CD-ROM. The CD-ROM (for 1996 only) is available at a cost of $10.00. (Item #404) 3 July 2003 Site Index What's New Search Disclaimer Privacy Policy Press Releases About the FFIEC Press Releases Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council Reports For Immediate Release Press Release August 1, 2003 Reporting Forms Tables are in Portable Document Format (PDF). Handbooks & Catalogues Enforcement Actions and Orders On-line Information Systems Other FFIEC Sites Examiner Education Office Appraisal Subcommittee HMDA CRA The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) today announced the availability of data for the year 2002 regarding mortgage lending transactions at 7,771 financial institutions covered by the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) in metropolitan areas throughout the nation. These data include disclosure statements for each financial institution, aggregate data for each metropolitan area, and nationwide summary statistics regarding lending patterns. A fact sheet and the nationwide summary statistics are attached to this press release; the following provides a general overview. The FFIEC prepares and distributes the individual disclosure statements and the aggregate reports on behalf of its member agencies-the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Reserve Board, National Credit Union Administration, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and Office of Thrift Supervision-and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Lenders are required to make the disclosure statements available at their home offices within three business days of receiving the statements. In addition, for other metropolitan areas in which they have offices, lenders must either make a copy of the statements available at one branch per metropolitan area or provide a copy upon written request. The disclosure statements and aggregate reports are now available for public inspection at central depositories throughout the nation. The HMDA data cover home purchase and home improvement loans and contain information about loan originations, loan purchases, and applications that did not result in a loan. The 2002 data include a total of 31 million reported loans and applications, which is an increase of about 13 percent from 2001, primarily due to a significant increase in refinancing activity (approximately 22 percent) (Table 1). The number of home purchase loans extended in 2002 compared with 2001 varied by race and ethnicity. From 2001 to 2002, the number of such loans increased 11 percent for Hispanics, 18 percent for Asians, and 23 percent for Native Americans. Over the same period, blacks and whites had more moderate increases in home purchase lending; the number of such loans increased 2 percent for blacks and 3 percent for whites. From 1993 to 2002, the annual number of home purchase loans to Hispanics rose 186 percent; to Asians, 126 percent; to blacks, 80 percent; to Native Americans, 57 percent; and to whites, 30 percent. (The period 1993 to 2002 is used because HMDA coverage in 1993 was expanded to include significantly more independent mortgage companies than previously had been covered under HMDA.) Refer to Table 7, attached, for year-to-year changes during the period 1993 to 2002. The number of home purchase loans extended to all income groups increased modestly from 2001 to 2002. Applicants with incomes less than 80 percent of the median for the metropolitan area experienced an increase of 5 percent; applicants with incomes 80-99 percent of the median, 3 percent; applicants with incomes 100-119 percent of the median, 4 percent; and applicants with incomes 120 percent or more above the median, 4 percent. During the 1993 to 2002 period, the number of home purchase loans to applicants with incomes less than 80 percent of the median for the metropolitan area increased by 91 percent; to applicants with incomes 80-99 percent of the median, 57 percent; to applicants with incomes 100-119 percent of the median, 51 percent; and to applicants with incomes 120 percent or more above the median, 66 percent. Refer to Table 7 for year-to-year changes during the period. In 2002, the denial rates for conventional home purchase loans fell for the fourth consecutive year, after rising for most of the past decade (Table 3). In 1993, the overall denial rate for conventional home purchase loans was 17 percent; by 1998 this rate had increased to 29 percent. The denial rate fell to 28 percent in 1999; to 27 percent in 2000; and to 21 percent in 2001. In 2002, the denial rate was down to 14 percent. All ethnic and racial groups experienced lower denial rates in 2002 as compared with 2001, but denial rates continue to vary among racial and ethnic groups. In 2002, denial rates for conventional home purchase loans were as follows: for black applicants, 26 percent; for Native American applicants, 23 percent; for Hispanic applicants, 18 percent; for white applicants, 12 percent; and for Asian applicants, 10 percent. From 1993 to 2001, the proportion of home loan applications of all types with missing race or ethnicity data increased from 8 percent to 30 percent. This proportion fell to 28 percent in 2002 (Table 8). The proportion of applications for home purchase loans without race or ethnicity information is lower than for applications for refinancings and home improvement loans, but still has grown substantially throughout the years and follows the same pattern as for applications of all types. Four percent of home purchase loan applications lacked race or ethnicity information in 1993; in 2001, the proportion was 18 percent, and involved roughly 1.4 million applications. In 2002, the proportion fell to 15 percent, and involved about 1.1 million applications. For home purchase loans originated, the same general pattern is observed: 3 percent lacked information on race or ethnicity in 1993, by 2001 the proportion had grown to 13 percent, then fell to 12 percent in 2002. Until recently, lenders were not required to request information on an applicant's race or ethnicity and sex when an application was taken entirely by telephone. Because the growth in missing data on race or ethnicity could complicate analyses of changes in home mortgage lending over time, the Board revised the rule regarding telephone applications. For all applications taken on or after January 1, 2003, lenders are required to ask applicants for race, ethnicity, and sex information in telephone applications. For applications taken in person or by mail or electronic means (such as by facsimile or the Internet), a lender must request the information. In all cases, an applicant has the option not to provide the information. The location of the central depository for a metropolitan area can be obtained by calling the FFIEC at 202/872-7500. The FFIEC distributes the disclosure statements to institutions and central depositories in electronic form only. In addition, the FFIEC makes HMDA data directly available to the public in various formats, including magnetic tape and CD-ROM, and at the FFIEC web site (www.ffiec.gov/hmda). Some data are available in paper form (tables for 2002 showing key demographic information for metropolitan areas, for instance). An order form gives descriptions of the various reports, prices, and formats. It is available for printing from the FFIEC web site (www.ffiec.gov/hmda/orderform.htm). Advance orders will be filled when the data become available. The HMDA data also include information on loans that are sold, showing the type of purchaser of the loan. Among other things, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) uses this information in assessing the performance of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in meeting their legislatively mandated affordable housing goals. The FFIEC also provides data from the nation's seven private mortgage insurance (PMI) companies. The 2002 PMI data include information on approximately 2.6 million applications for mortgage insurance; about 1.5 million applications were to insure home purchase mortgages, and about 1.1 million were to insure mortgages to refinance existing obligations. By August, these data will be available-at individual PMI companies, at the central depositories in each metropolitan area, and from the FFIEC-in the same types of reports and in the same formats as the HMDA data. Questions about a HMDA report for a specific lender should be directed to the lender's supervisory agency at the number listed below: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation - 877/275-3342; hearing impaired - 800/925-4618 Federal Reserve Board, HMDA Assistance Line - 202/452-2016 National Credit Union Administration, Office of Examination - 703/518-6360 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Compliance Division - 202/874-4428 Office of Thrift Supervision, Consumer Programs - 202/906-6315 Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Housing - 202/755-7530. Attachments: Fact Sheet on 2002 Data (with Tables) (Note: Tables are in PDF) HMDA Data Order Forms and Item Descriptions ( PDF) Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision Site Index Search Disclaimer Privacy Policy About the FFIEC Reports - Nationwide Summary Statistics for 2002 HMDA Data Fact Sheet (August 2003) Press Releases Tables are in Portable Document Format (PDF). Reports The following nationwide summary statistics are based on data compiled by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) for institutions covered by the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. 1 What's New Reporting Forms Handbooks & Catalogues Enforcement Actions and Orders On-line Information Systems Other FFIEC Sites Examiner Education Office Appraisal Subcommittee HMDA CRA The Data For 2002, the FFIEC prepared 57,429 disclosure statements for 7,771 lenders, with a separate statement for each metropolitan area in which a lender had an office or could be deemed to have an office under Regulation C, based on the number of applications and loans (Table 1). The data reflect the lending activity of 4,026 commercial banks; 671 savings associations; 1,795 credit unions; and 1,279 mortgage companies (of which 1,004 were independent mortgage companies). Applications Received and Loans Made In 2002, lenders covered by HMDA reported a total of about 31 million loans and applications that did not result in an origination (Table 1). The total volume of reported home loan applications and purchases increased in 2002 by 13 percent from 2001, primarily due to a significant increase (22 percent) in refinancing activity (Tables 1 and 2). The 2002 data show that lenders acted on approximately 26 million applications for home purchase loans, home improvement loans, and refinancings (compared with approximately 24 million in 2001), and they purchased about 5 million loans (compared with 4 million in 2001). The number of applications for home purchase loans in 2002 increased from 2001 levels by 3 percent. Requests for refinancings accounted for 66 percent of all home loan applications (data not shown in tables). This proportion is higher than in 2001, when applications for refinancings accounted for about 60 percent of all applications. The increased volume and share of applications for refinancings resulted primarily from a sharp drop in interest rates on mortgage loans. Loan Programs and Changes in Lending Volume by Race and Income Lending institutions tend to specialize in different types of home loans. For example, in the case of home purchase loans, mortgage companies tend to do most of the government-backed lending, including FHA and VA loans, accounting for about 84 percent of all such originations in 2002. Depository institutions, particularly commercial banks, do most of the home improvement (87 percent) and multifamily lending (90 percent). (Data not shown in tables.) Applications for different types of home purchase loans vary across racial and ethnic groups and income categories (Table 2). For example, in 2002, 27 percent of Hispanic applicants and 28 percent black applicants for home purchase loans applied for government-backed mortgages; the comparable rates for Asians, whites, and Native Americans were 6 percent, 14 percent, and 19 percent, respectively. Moreover, 25 percent of home purchase loan applicants with incomes less than 80 percent of the median family income for their metropolitan areas applied for government-backed loans; by contrast, 7 percent of applicants with incomes of at least 120 percent of the metropolitan area median applied for such loans (derived from Table 2, government-backed memo item). In addition, loan applicants seeking to buy a home in low- or moderate income neighborhoods were more likely to apply for government-backed loans than those seeking to buy homes in upper-income neighborhoods. In central cities and neighborhoods with greater proportions of minority residents, applications for government-backed homes accounted for a higher share of all home purchase loan applications. The greater reliance of lower-income households on government-backed loans reflects several factors. The low downpayment requirements and the ability to finance closing costs make FHA and VA loans particularly attractive to lower-income households and first-time homebuyers, who are likely to have fewer financial resources than other homebuyers. Dollar limits on the amount of FHA loan insurance or VA loan guarantees make these government-backed loans unavailable or less attractive to households seeking to buy more expensive properties. For conventional and government-backed home purchase lending, lending to Asians, Hispanics and Native Americans was up about 18 percent, 11 percent, and 23 percent respectively from 2001 to 2002; lending to whites and blacks rose 3 percent and 2 percent respectively from 2001 to 2002 (Table 7). Home purchase lending increased modestly for all income categories from 2001 to 2002. Lower-income households experienced the greatest expansion, 5 percent; over the same period, home purchase lending increased by 4 percent for middle- and upper-income households, and by 3 percent for moderate-income households (Table 7). Denial Rates The overall denial rate for conventional home purchase loans in 2002 was 14 percent, down from a rate of 21 percent in 2001. A large portion of this decline can be attributed to a significant drop in the number of applications for manufactured home loans, which have very high denial rates.2 (Data not shown in tables). In 2002, the roughly two-dozen reporters categorized by HUD as manufactured home loan specialists denied about 60 percent of all the applications they received for conventional home purchase loans. This proportion represents a marginal decline from earlier years, when these lenders denied about two-thirds of all their applicants. In 2002, there was a sharp contraction from 2001 in reported manufactured home loan activity.3 (Data not shown in tables.) The number of applications for conventional home purchase loans submitted to these lenders in 2002 dropped 65 percent from 2001, reflecting difficulties in the manufactured housing market. If the manufactured home purchase loan applications and denials reported by these lenders are excluded from both the 2001 and 2002 data, the denial rates for conventional home purchase loan applications would have been 13 percent in 2001 (instead of 21 percent) and 12 percent in 2002 (instead of 14 percent). The HMDA data show that denial rates for home purchase loan applications vary with income. For example, in 2002 the denial rate for conventional home purchase loans for lower-income applicants was 20 percent as compared with 8 percent for higher-income applicants (derived from Table 3). Denial rates for conventional home purchase loans continue to vary among applicants by race or ethnicity and by income; in 2002, however, denial rates were markedly lower than in 2001 for every race and income group. In 2002, 26 percent of black applicants, 23 percent of Native American applicants, 18 percent of Hispanic applicants, 12 percent of white applicants, and 10 percent of Asian applicants were denied conventional home purchase loans (Table 3). Denial rates for conventional home purchase loans in 2001 were 36 percent for blacks, 35 percent for Native Americans, 23 percent for Hispanics, 16 percent for whites, and 11 percent for Asians. The decline in denial rates from 2001 to 2002 follows the pattern of declining denial rates since 1998. This pattern is in contrast to the experience over the longer period from 1993 to 1998, when denial rates for all ethnic and racial groups increased substantially. Differences in the income levels of the racial or ethnic groups account for some of the differences among them in denial rates for 2002. However, other factors are more important given that for all income groups, white and Asian applicants experienced lower rates of denial than Native American, black, or Hispanic applicants (Table 4). The extent to which racial discrimination may account for remaining differences in denial rates across racial and ethnic lines cannot be determined from the HMDA data. Many lenders report reasons for denial of loan applications; in 2002, as in prior years, the reason most frequently cited for the denial of a single-family home loan application, regardless of the applicant's race or ethnic status, was poor or no credit history (data not shown in tables). This factor was cited in 41 percent of the denials for Native Americans, 37 percent of the denials for blacks, 33 percent of the denials for whites, 31 percent of the denials for Hispanics, and in 23 percent of the denials for Asians. Missing Information on Race and Ethnicity Until recently, lenders were not required to collect information on an applicant's race or ethnicity and sex for applications taken entirely by telephone. However, as of January 1, 2003, lenders are required to ask applicants for race, ethnicity, and sex information in telephone applications. For applications taken in person or by mail or electronic means (such as by facsimile or the Internet), a lender must request the information. In all cases, an applicant has the option not to provide the information. The incidence of applications and loans reported without data on race or ethnicity (based on whether information was missing for the first listed applicant) grew from 1993 to 2001, then fell slightly from 2001 to 2002. From 1993 to 2001, the proportion of home loan applications of all types with missing race or ethnicity data increased from about 8 percent to about 30 percent. However, this proportion fell to 28 percent in 2002. (Table 8). For home purchase loan applications, the proportion of applications missing race or ethnicity data is lower than the proportion for other application types, but follows the same general pattern. Applications for home purchase loans lacking the information grew from about 4 percent in 1993 to about 18 percent in 2001, involving roughly 1.4 million loan applications. In 2002, the percentage of such applications fell to 15 percent, but involved roughly 1.1 million applications. The same pattern is observed for home purchase loans originated. In 1993, 3 percent of such loans lacked information about race or ethnicity. By 2001, 13 percent lacked this information; in 2002, the proportion of home purchase loans missing the information fell to 12 percent. The increase in home purchase applications missing data on race and ethnicity is due in part to the increased proportion of all home purchase loan applications reported by institutions specializing in manufactured home lending. (Data not shown in tables). These institutions frequently use indirect methods for soliciting applications, which are often submitted without the race and ethnicity data. For example, preliminary estimates for 2002 suggest that nearly 26 percent of the conventional home purchase loan applications filed by lenders specializing in manufactured home lending did not include race or ethnicity data.4 For all other conventional home purchase loan applications in 2002, the incidence of missing race and ethnicity data was 15 percent. Under revisions to HMDA effective January 1, 2004, loans for manufactured homes will be distinguished in the HMDA data from loans for site-built homes. Attachments: Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Footnotes 1. The FFIEC has also compiled insurance data submitted by seven major private mortgage insurance (PMI) companies under the auspices of the Mortgage Insurance Companies of America. These data, which relate to application decisions made by the PMI companies during 2002, show about 2.6 million applications for PMI (about 1.5 million for home purchase loans, and 1.1 million for refinancings). These data are available from the individual companies, and-in the same formats as the HMDA data-at the central depositories and from the FFIEC. 2. These calculations are based on the list of lenders identified by HUD as manufactured home lending specialists in 2001, which was the most recent list available at the time of this publication. 3. A comparison of 2001 and 2002 loan application volumes reported by lenders identified by HUD as specializing in manufactured home lending reveals that most of the decline in reported application activity among these lenders is associated with four reporters. Together, these four lenders reported nearly 706,000 fewer applications in 2002 than in 2001. Other evidence of contraction in the manufactured home sector comes from industry statistics that indicate shipments of manufactured homes fell 12 percent from 2001 to 2002. 4. More precise estimates are not possible until HUD publishes a final list of lenders specializing in manufactured home lending for the year 2002. This information was not available at the time of this publication. Preliminary estimates for 2002 were based on the 2001 HUD list of manufactured home lenders. 1. Residential lending activity reported by financial institutions covered by HMDA, 1981-2002 Number of loans1 (millions) Year Number of reporting institutions2 Number of metropolitan area disclosure reports 1981 1.28 8,094 10,945 1982 1.13 8,258 11,357 1983 1.71 8,050 10,970 1984 1.86 8,491 11,799 1985 1.98 8,072 12,567 1986 2.83 8,898 12,329 1987 3.42 9,431 13,033 1988 3.39 9,319 13,919 3.13 9,203 14,154 1990 6.59 9,332 24,041 1991 7.89 9,358 25,934 1992 12.01 9,073 28,782 1993 15.38 9,650 35,069 1994 12.20 9,858 37,742 1995 11.23 9,539 36,611 1996 14.81 9,328 42,936 1997 16.41 7,925 47,416 1998 24.66 7,837 57,294 1999 22.91 7,833 56,966 2000 19.24 7,713 52,776 2001 27.58 7,631 53,066 2002 31.24 7,771 57,429 1989 3 4 1. Before 1990, includes only loans originated by covered institutions; beginning in 1990 (first year under the revised reporting system), includes loans originated and purchased, applications approved but not accepted by the applicant, applications denied or withdrawn, and applications closed because information was incomplete. 2. Beginning with data for 1989, HMDA was amended to extend coverage to mortgage lending subsidiaries of bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies, and to savings and loan service corporations. Congress expanded HMDA coverage effective beginning with data for 1990, to include most types of mortgage lenders, including independent mortgage companies. Beginning with data for 1993, coverage of independent mortgage companies was significantly increased by an amendment taking into account lending volume as well as asset size. 3. Revised from preliminary figures published in Glenn B. Canner and Dolores S. Smith, “Home Mortgage Disclosure Act: Expanded Data on Residential Lending,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, vol. 77 (November 1991), p. 861, to reflect corrections and the reporting of additional data. 4. First year since HMDA was enacted that the asset exemption threshold for coverage of depository institutions was increased to account for the effects of inflation. SOURCE. For this and subsequent tables, FFIEC, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data. 2. Applications for one- to four-family home loans under HMDA, grouped by purpose of loan and distributed by characteristic of applicant and census tract, 2002 Home purchase Government-backed1 Characteristic APPLICANT Racial/ethnic identity American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic White Other Joint (white/minority) Total Income (percentage of metropolitan area median)2 Less than 50 50-79 80-99 100-119 120 or more Total CENSUS TRACT Racial/ethnic composition (minorities as percentage of population) Less than 10 10-19 20-49 50-79 80-100 Total Home refinancing Conventional Home improvement Number Percent Memo: Percentage of home purchase loans for given characteristic 6,118 16,914 140,762 187,793 639,653 13,706 29,153 1,034,099 0.6 1.6 13.6 18.2 61.9 1.3 2.8 100.0 19.3 5.8 27.5 26.8 14.2 13.7 18.5 16.4 25,598 272,980 371,386 512,786 3,862,930 86,635 128,234 5,260,549 0.5 5.2 7.1 9.7 73.4 1.6 2.4 100.0 80.7 94.2 72.5 73.2 85.8 86.3 81.5 83.6 52,672 527,723 767,187 888,858 9,196,608 217,098 282,694 11,932,840 0.4 4.4 6.4 7.4 77.1 1.8 2.4 100.0 5,568 16,250 89,342 98,042 688,476 9,802 18,488 925,968 0.6 1.8 9.6 10.6 74.4 1.1 2.0 100.0 140,813 351,357 185,485 121,778 172,437 971,870 14.5 36.2 19.1 12.5 17.7 100.0 24.1 26.0 21.5 16.6 7.0 16.2 443,366 1,001,035 677,352 610,229 2,297,993 5,029,975 8.8 19.9 13.5 12.1 45.7 100.0 75.9 74.0 78.5 83.4 93.0 83.8 1,311,558 2,809,222 1,957,266 1,728,282 5,959,057 13,765,385 9.5 20.4 14.2 12.6 43.3 100.0 179,552 290,912 181,057 150,897 443,088 1,245,506 14.4 23.4 14.5 12.1 35.6 100.0 382,126 220,003 237,132 74,183 55,534 968,978 39.4 22.7 24.5 7.7 5.7 100.0 13.8 16.0 18.1 17.8 18.8 15.7 2,393,286 1,158,540 1,071,298 343,333 239,910 5,206,367 46.0 22.3 20.6 6.6 4.6 100.0 86.2 84.0 81.9 82.2 81.2 84.3 7,240,763 3,114,530 2,806,832 960,785 725,114 14,848,024 48.8 21.0 18.9 6.5 4.9 100.0 610,722 234,088 219,918 83,612 88,827 1,237,167 49.4 18.9 17.8 6.8 7.2 100.0 Number Percent Memo: Percentage of home purchase loans for given characteristic Number Percent Number Percent 2. Continued Home purchase Government-backed1 Home refinancing Conventional Home improvement Number Percent Memo: Percentage of home purchase loans for given characteristic Income3 Low Moderate Middle Upper Total 20,442 160,687 576,342 223,876 981,347 2.1 16.4 58.7 22.8 100.0 14.9 20.0 18.1 10.7 15.8 117,187 643,881 2,603,910 1,864,153 5,229,131 2.2 12.3 49.8 35.6 100.0 85.1 80.0 81.9 89.3 84.2 276,278 1,740,265 7,567,123 5,321,540 14,905,206 1.9 11.7 50.8 35.7 100.0 36,450 195,264 685,205 350,570 1,267,489 2.9 15.4 54.1 27.7 100.0 Location4 Central city Non-central city 453,600 542,493 45.5 54.5 17.6 14.6 2,117,305 3,180,330 40.0 60.0 82.4 85.4 5,624,175 9,452,275 37.3 62.7 498,344 791,889 38.6 61.4 996,093 100.0 15.8 5,297,635 100.0 84.2 15,076,450 100.0 1,290,233 100.0 Characteristic Total Number Percent Memo: Percentage of home purchase loans for given characteristic Number Percent Number Percent Note: Lenders reported 26,440,691 applications for home loans in 2002, but applicant and geographic information was not reported for all applications. Thus, the distribution of applications varies in number by characteristic. 1. Loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, or the Rural Housing Service. 2. Median for a metropolitan area is median family income of the metropolitan area in which the property related to the loan is located. 3. Census tracts are categorized by the median family income for the tract relative to the median family income for the metropolitan area in which the tract is located. Categories are defined as follows: Low income for census tract less that 50 percent of median family income for metropolitan area; Moderate income, median family income for census tract 50 percent to 79 percent of metropolitan area median; Middle income, median family income 80 percent to 119 percent of metropolitan area median; Upper income, median family income 120 percent or more of metropolitan area median. 4. For census tracts located in metropolitan areas. 3. Disposition of conventional home purchase loan applications, by characteristics of applicant, 2002 Percentage distribution by number of applications Type of disposition Applicant characteristics Approved Denied Withdrawn File closed Total American Indian/Alaskan Native 66.2 23.3 7.5 2.9 100 Asian/ Pacific Island 80.1 9.8 7.7 2.4 100 Black 61.9 26.3 8.4 3.5 100 Hispanic 70.5 18.2 8.1 3.3 100 White 80.7 11.6 6.1 1.7 100 Other 76.3 11.8 8.6 3.3 100 Joint (white/minority) 78.8 11.4 7.8 2.0 100 Less than 50 61.7 28.8 6.7 2.7 100 50-79 74.2 16.5 6.7 2.6 100 80-99 78.5 12.3 6.8 2.4 100 100-119 80.4 10.3 7.0 2.3 100 120 or more 82.6 8.0 7.2 2.1 100 Race/ethnic identity Income (percentage of metropolitan area median)1 1. Metropolitan area median is median family income of the metropolitan area in which the property related to the loan is located. 4. Disposition of conventional home purchase loan applications, by income and race of applicant, 2002 Percent distribution by number of applications Type of disposition Applicant income and racial/ethnic identity1 Approved Denied Withdrawn File closed Total American Indian/Alaskan Native 54.5 35.5 6.7 3.3 100 Asian/Pacific Islander 73.8 16.2 7.5 2.6 100 Less than 50 Black 53.3 35.4 7.5 3.8 100 Hispanic 60.6 29.0 7.0 3.4 100 White 68.9 23.9 5.2 2.0 100 American Indian/Alaskan Native 68.2 21.7 6.9 3.2 100 Asian/Pacific Islander 81.0 10.2 6.4 2.4 100 Black 62.9 25.1 7.9 4.2 100 Hispanic 69.2 20.2 7.2 3.4 100 White 79.9 12.9 5.3 1.8 100 American Indian/Alaskan Native 72.9 15.7 8.4 2.9 100 Asian/Pacific Islander 82.1 8.8 6.8 2.3 100 Black 67.4 20.3 8.5 3.9 100 Hispanic 73.0 16.2 7.7 3.2 100 White 84.0 8.7 5.6 1.7 100 American Indian/Alaskan Native 78.4 10.7 8.0 2.9 100 Asian/Pacific Islander 81.1 8.7 7.7 2.5 100 Black 70.6 17.0 9.2 3.2 100 Hispanic 75.4 12.9 8.2 3.6 100 White 86.1 6.3 6.0 1.6 100 50-79 80-119 120 or more 1. Applicant income shown as percentage of the median family income of the metropolitan area in which the property related to the loan is located. 5. Conventional home purchase loans by racial/ethnic identity and income of borrowers, 1993-2002 Number of loans and percentage change Number of loans Year Borrower and census tract characteristic 1997 1998 Percentage change Period 1993 1994 1995 1996 1999 2000 American Indian 8,638 10,691 10,712 11,368 11,254 13,175 20,965 19,820 Asian 78,671 93,319 85,571 91,547 103,192 118,486 138,453 152,715 Black 81,322 125,796 138,034 135,944 139,544 158,266 178,108 180,445 Hispanic 91,345 129,695 134,982 135,683 132,808 162,365 197,731 225,539 -40.8 21.5 64.9 10.3 4.2 21.9 146.5 12.5 1.3 -7.8 14.1 133.4 21.8 14.1 11.8 25.0 244.8 14.9 1.5 -4.8 -0.5 6.3 43.2 119.3 17.1 12.7 14.8 -1.5 2.6 13.4 .5 -2.1 22.3 -3.3 6.7 2.0 189,817 54.7 9.7 314,951 42.0 4.1 15.7 252,057 -5.5 16.9 -1.0 7.0 -8.3 166,321 59.1 6.1 .2 18.6 14,244 193,931 20012002 19981999 23.8 11,728 159,065 20002001 19971998 19951996 19931994 19992000 19961997 19941995 2002 2001 Memo: Percentage change 1993-2002 Borrower Racial/ethnic identity White 1,971,153 2,281,450 2,205,360 2,354,024 2,402,232 2,760,370 2,800,695 2,666,849 2,654,809 2,822,776 Income (percentage of metropolitan area median)1 Less than 80 407,059 516,824 494,007 558,162 571,125 712,690 818,572 803,625 796,138 892,776 27.0 -4.4 13.0 2.3 24.8 14.9 -1.8 -0.9 12.1 80-99 248,402 295,734 282,925 315,681 323,000 386,811 411,327 407,703 421,845 476,251 19.1 -4.3 11.6 2.3 19.8 6.3 -.9 3.5 12.9 91.7 100-119 246,294 285,044 268,682 299,878 306,796 367,248 381,458 380,762 396,689 442,731 15.7 -5.7 11.6 2.3 19.7 3.9 -.2 4.2 11.6 79.8 120 or more 950,597 1,069,305 1,047,464 1,172,762 1,251,561 1,450,085 1,506,628 1,572,914 1,610,825 1,718,553 12.5 -2.0 12.0 6.7 15.9 3.9 4.4 2.4 6.7 80.8 5. (continued) Number of loans Borrower and census tract characteristic 1993 1994 1995 1996 Percentage change Year Period 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Memo: 19931994 19941995 19951996 19961997 19971998 19981999 19992000 20002001 20012002 Percentage change 1993-2002 Census Tract Racial composition (minorities as a percentage of population) Less than 10 1,077,879 1,197,432 1,153,284 1,321,350 1,362,339 1,594,523 1,653,163 1,625,595 1,672,287 1,768,552 11.1 -3.7 14.6 3.1 17.0 3.7 -1.7 2.9 5.8 64.1 10-19 386,443 460,110 437,355 510,044 548,938 664,749 705,721 718,107 747,682 819,564 19.1 -4.9 16.6 7.6 21.1 6.2 1.8 4.1 9.6 112.1 20-49 272,690 337,292 322,835 370,646 398,713 493,515 556,203 591,202 616,421 711,096 23.7 -4.3 14.8 7.6 23.8 12.7 6.3 4.3 15.4 160.8 50-79 81,628 101,817 98,145 105,828 113,049 136,923 156,478 171,565 175,933 208,014 24.7 -3.6 7.8 6.8 21.1 14.3 9.6 2.5 18.2 154.8 80-100 43,263 56,329 56,545 55,981 59,347 71,529 86,815 98,868 99,112 125,122 30.2 .4 -1.0 6.0 20.5 21.4 13.9 0.2 26.2 189.2 Low or moderate 185,014 224,434 232,659 255,204 268,463 323,795 366,187 393,374 388,519 449,042 21.3 3.7 9.7 5.2 20.6 13.1 7.4 -1.2 15.6 142.7 Middle 897,645 1,053,155 1,010,219 1,145,439 1,185,276 1,416,359 1,526,200 1,566,251 1,629,058 1,803,996 17.3 -4.1 13.4 3.5 19.5 7.8 2.6 4.0 10.7 101.0 Upper 783,695 12.0 -5.7 16.8 6.6 19.0 3.9 -1.4 4.1 6.7 78.0 Income of census tract2 877,527 827,855 966,599 1,030,747 1,226,778 1,274,545 1,256,511 1,307,542 1,395,165 1. Metropolitan area median is median family income of the metropolitan area in which the property related to the loan is located. 2. Census tracts are categorized by the median family income for the tract relative to the median income for the metropolitan area in which the tract is located. Categories are defined as follows: low or moderate, median family income for census tract less than 80 percent of median family income for metropolitan area; middle income, median family income for census tract 80 percent to 119 percent of metropolitan area median; upper income, median family income 120 percent or more of metropolitan area median. 6. Government-backed home purchase loans by racial/ethnic identity and income of borrowers, 1993-2002 Number of loans and percentage change Number of loans Borrower and census tract characteristic 1993 1994 1995 1996 Percentage change Year Period 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 19931994 19941995 19951996 19961997 19971998 Memo: 19981999 19992000 20002001 Percentage change 20012002 1993-2002 Borrower Racial/ethnic identity American Indian 3,298 3,295 2,850 3,743 3,679 4,912 5,158 5,094 3,551 4,508 -.1 -13.5 31.3 -1.7 33.5 5.0 -1.2 -30.3 27.0 Asian 12,698 11,662 11,813 13,797 14,998 15,214 16,989 15,728 16,086 12,978 -8.2 1.3 16.8 8.7 1.4 11.7 -7.4 2.3 -19.3 2.2 Black 81,057 92,514 102,237 111,748 117,689 120,827 131,956 126,227 118,922 101,674 14.1 10.5 9.3 5.3 2.6 9.2 -4.3 -5.8 -14.5 25.4 Hispanic 66,089 71,761 81,067 109,343 121,574 132,274 150,789 148,775 153,752 134,942 8.6 13.0 34.9 11.2 8.8 14.0 -1.3 3.3 -12.2 104.2 White 606,619 522,932 512,701 583,962 594,837 621,826 640,173 558,689 602,733 518,956 -13.8 -2.0 13.9 1.9 4.5 3.0 -12.7 7.9 -13.9 -14.5 Less than 80 260,387 250,708 244,011 310,788 349,829 380,605 424,215 388,162 420,698 379,248 -3.7 -2.7 27.4 12.6 8.8 11.5 -8.5 8.4 -9.9 45.6 80-99 148,963 140,168 142,470 168,753 173,160 178,973 193,107 179,307 184,730 148,285 -5.9 1.6 18.4 2.6 3.4 7.9 -7.1 3.0 -19.7 -0.5 36.7 Income (percentage of metropolitan area median)1 100-119 110,821 100,398 105,308 118,066 117,922 122,536 131,331 122,585 125,655 97,859 -9.4 4.9 12.1 -.1 3.9 7.2 -6.7 2.5 -22.1 -11.7 120 or more 165,111 146,654 157,666 173,402 164,429 170,384 177,860 169,660 170,771 136,691 -11.2 7.5 10.0 -5.2 3.6 4.4 -4.6 0.7 -20.0 -17.2 6. (continued) Number of loans Borrower and census tract characteristic 1993 1994 1995 1996 Percentage change Year Period 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 19931994 Memo: 19941995 19951996 19961997 19971998 19981999 19992000 20002001 20012002 Percentage change 1993-2002 8.7 Census Tract Racial composition (minorities as a percentage of population) Less than 10 285,148 246,603 246,410 297,036 312,574 329,303 360,012 328,597 364,709 309,897 -13.5 -.1 20.5 5.2 5.4 9.3 -8.7 11.0 -15.0 10-19 163,988 148,902 152,157 180,104 182,787 196,643 213,278 196,082 208,670 174,786 -9.2 2.2 18.4 1.5 7.6 8.5 -8.1 6.4 -16.2 6.6 20-49 163,230 159,599 162,391 192,504 197,994 213,323 227,165 211,882 215,533 181,683 -2.2 1.7 18.5 2.9 7.7 6.5 -6.7 1.7 -15.7 11.3 50-79 46,295 46,085 48,272 57,631 61,929 65,120 68,911 65,295 63,593 53,134 -.5 4.7 19.4 7.5 5.2 5.8 -5.2 -2.6 -16.4 14.8 80-100 27,138 27,943 32,580 39,405 43,993 44,513 47,000 46,376 44,040 36,901 3.0 16.6 20.9 11.6 1.2 5.6 -1.3 -5.0 -16.2 36.0 Low or moderate 107,348 100,613 110,075 133,729 142,008 145,386 155,393 153,313 153,064 131,727 -6.3 9.4 21.5 6.2 2.4 6.9 -1.3 -0.2 -13.9 22.7 Middle 405,250 375,626 376,620 447,372 467,774 500,665 541,348 503,237 532,983 454,075 -7.3 .3 18.8 4.6 7.0 8.1 -7.0 5.9 -14.8 12.0 Upper 178,137 158,462 161,753 193,611 198,742 212,015 229,603 201,888 219,098 177,675 -11.0 2.1 19.7 2.7 6.7 8.3 -12.1 8.5 -18.9 -0.3 Income of census tract2 1. Metropolitan area median is median family income of the metropolitan area in which the property related to the loan is located. 2. Census tracts are categorized by the median family income for the tract relative to the median income for the metropolitan area in which the tract is located. Categories are defined as follows: low or moderate, median family income for census tract less than 80 percent of median family income for metropolitan area; middle income, median family income for census tract 80 percent to 119 percent of metropolitan area median; upper income, median family income 120 percent or more of metropolitan area median. 7. All home purchase loans by racial/ethnic identity and income of borrowers, 1993-20021 Number of loans and percentage change Number of loans Borrower and census tract characteristic 1993 1994 1995 1996 Percentage change Year Period 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 19931994 19941995 19951996 Memo: 19961997 19971998 19981999 19992000 20002001 20012002 Percentage change 1993-2002 Borrower Racial/ethnic identity American Indian 11,936 13,986 13,562 15,111 14,933 18,087 26,123 24,914 15,279 18,752 17.2 -3.0 11.4 -1.2 21.1 44.4 -4.6 -38.7 22.7 57.1 Asian 91,369 104,981 97,384 105,344 118,190 133,700 155,442 168,443 175,151 206,909 14.9 -7.2 8.2 12.2 13.1 16.3 8.4 4.0 18.1 126.5 Black 162,379 218,310 240,268 247,692 257,233 279,093 310,064 306,672 285,243 291,491 34.4 10.1 3.1 3.9 8.5 11.1 -1.1 -7.0 2.2 79.5 Hispanic 157,434 201,456 216,049 245,026 254,382 294,639 348,520 374,314 405,809 449,893 28.0 7.2 13.4 3.8 15.8 18.3 7.4 8.4 10.9 185.8 8.8 -3.1 8.1 2.0 12.9 1.7 -6.3 1.0 2.6 29.6 White 2,577,772 2,804,382 2,718,061 2,937,986 2,997,069 3,382,196 3,440,868 3,225,538 3,257,542 3,341,732 Income (percentage of metropolitan area median)2 Less than 80 667,446 767,532 738,015 868,950 920,954 1,093,295 1,242,787 1,191,787 1,216,836 1,272,024 15.0 -3.8 17.7 6.0 18.7 13.7 -4.1 2.1 4.5 90.6 80-99 397,365 435,902 425,395 484,434 496,160 565,784 604,434 587,010 606,575 624,536 9.7 -2.4 13.9 2.4 14.0 6.8 -2.9 3.3 3.0 57.2 357,115 385,442 373,991 417,944 424,718 489,784 512,789 503,347 522,344 540,590 7.9 -3.0 11.8 1.6 15.3 4.7 -1.8 3.8 3.5 51.4 9.0 -.9 11.7 5.2 14.4 4.0 3.4 2.2 4.1 66.3 100-119 120 or more 1,115,708 1,215,959 1,205,130 1,346,164 1,415,990 1,620,469 1,684,488 1,742,574 1,781,596 1,855,244 7. (continued) Number of loans Year Borrower and census tract characteristic 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Percentage change Period 1999 2000 2001 2002 Memo: 19931994 19941995 19951996 19961997 19971998 19981999 19992000 20002001 20002001 Percentage change 1993-2002 Census Tract Racial composition (minorities as a percentage of population) Less than 10 1,363,027 1,444,035 1,399,694 1,618,386 1,674,913 1,923,826 2,013,175 1,954,192 2,036,996 2,078,449 5.9 -3.1 15.6 3.5 14.9 4.6 -2.9 4.2 2.0 52.5 10-19 550,431 609,012 589,512 690,148 731,725 861,392 918,999 914,189 956,352 994,350 10.6 -3.2 17.1 6.0 17.7 6.7 -0.5 4.6 4.0 80.6 20-49 435,920 496,891 485,225 563,150 596,707 706,838 783,368 803,084 831,954 892,779 14.0 -2.3 16.1 6.0 18.5 10.8 2.5 3.6 7.3 104.8 50-79 127,923 147,902 146,416 163,459 174,978 202,043 225,389 236,860 239,526 261,148 15.6 -1.0 11.6 7.0 15.5 11.6 5.1 1.1 9.0 104.1 80-100 70,401 84,272 89,124 95,386 103,340 116,042 133,815 145,244 143,152 162,023 19.7 5.8 7.0 8.3 12.3 15.3 8.5 -1.4 13.2 130.1 292,362 325,047 342,731 388,933 410,471 469,181 521,580 546,687 541,583 580,769 Income of census tract3 Low or moderate 11.2 5.4 13.5 5.5 14.3 11.2 4.8 -0.9 7.2 98.6 Middle 1,302,895 1,428,781 1,386,839 1,592,811 1,653,050 1,917,024 2,067,548 2,069,488 2,162,041 2,258,071 9.7 -2.9 14.9 3.8 16.0 7.9 0.1 4.5 4.4 73.3 Upper 961,832 1,035,989 989,608 1,160,210 1,229,489 1,438,793 1,504,148 1,458,399 1,526,640 1,572,840 7.7 -4.5 17.2 6.0 17.0 4.5 -3.0 4.7 3.0 63.5 1. Includes both conventional and government-backed home purchase loans. 2. Metropolitan area median is median family income of the metropolitan area in which the property related to the loan is located. 3. Census tracts are categorized by the median family income for the tract relative to the median income for the metropolitan area in which the tract is located. Categories are defined as follows: low or moderate, median family income for census tract less than 80 percent of median family income for metropolitan area; middle income, median family income for census tract 80 percent to 119 percent of metropolitan area median; upper income, median family income 120 percent or more of metropolitan area median. 8. Applications for home loans missing race or ethnicity information, 1993-2002 Total home loan applications Year Total Missing Home purchase loan applications Percent Total Missing Home purchase loans Percent Total Missing Percent 1993 13,618,477 1,027,218 7.5 4,508,448 199,772 4.4 3,187,693 102,777 3.2 1994 10,719,915 954,746 8.9 5,200,102 183,824 3.5 3,539,531 87,721 2.5 1995 9,955,171 1,037,202 10.4 5,484,332 200,087 3.6 3,495,749 101,790 2.9 1996 13,009,405 1,818,411 14.0 6,306,937 286,663 4.5 3,806,337 135,320 3.6 1997 14,330,133 2,525,962 17.6 6,748,794 415,011 6.1 3,955,104 191,821 4.8 1998 21,436,038 4,289,640 20.0 7,949,787 724,626 9.1 4,549,997 302,606 6.7 1999 19,905,868 4,452,654 22.4 8,426,010 845,851 10.0 4,849,772 407,983 8.4 2000 16,834,211 4,698,040 27.9 8,266,535 1,210,527 14.6 4,782,957 528,594 11.1 2001 23,821,375 7,074,462 29.7 7,672,299 1,377,297 18.0 4,932,839 637,902 12.9 2002 26,440,691 7,261,344 27.5 7,399,799 1,105,118 14.9 5,095,866 604,300 11.9 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM (PAYMENT INFORMATION) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ____________________ Order Form Received at FRB: Order Shipped by FRB: Please Print Legibly CONTACT NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ ORGANIZATION: ______________________________________________________________________________ ADDRESS: _____________________________________________________________________________________ CITY/STATE/ZIP: _______________________________________________________________________________ TELEPHONE: Check if: - - EXT. FAX: Profit Non-Profit - - _______ Organization Sector: Financial Institution Government Agency Media Public/Other SHIPMENT INFORMATION (check appropriate method): Please ship the completed order at my expense using my overnight carrier listed below* Carrier Name _______________________ Account Number /__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/ Fourth class via United States Postal Service at no charge. PAYMENT INFORMATION (check appropriate method): ~Advance payment required via check, Money Order, Visa, or MasterCard. Check Please make checks payable to: FFIEC Money Order Mail to: Federal Reserve Board Attn: CRA/HMDA Data Request 20th & Constitution Avenue, N.W. MS N502 Washington, DC 20551-0001* Phone: 202-452-2016 Fax: 202-452-6497** *Sending via overnight carrier will assist with the expedition of your order. **ONLY credit payments (VISA or MasterCard) or no charge items may be sent by fax. Visa Card Number /__/__/__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ MasterCard Expiration Date (mm/ccyy) /__/__/ - /__/__/__/__/ Signature (required when paying by credit card) _________________________________________ Date ___________ ~THE PAYMENT INFORMATION PAGE AND PAGES THAT HAVE THE REQUESTED ITEM(S) MUST BE SENT WITH YOUR PAYMENT. The omission of either will DELAY your order. 1 July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM (CENSUS DATA ITEMS) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ________ SELECTION LIST There is an additional charge for each year requested (see attached item descriptions) QTY UNIT COST TOTAL $250.00 Census Data on Cartridge (Item #104) $ Indicate year(s): ______, ______, ______, ______ Note: 2000 census tracts used beginning with 2003 data; 1996 census data combine HMDA and CRA information; therefore, file specifications are significantly different than prior years. The cartridge for 1996 and years thereafter includes census tracts and BNAs inside and outside 1990 MA redefinitions used beginning with 1994 HMDA data; 1990 census tracts used beginning with 1992 data; 1980 census tracts used with 1990 & 1991 data. Census Data on CD-ROM (Item #303) $ 10.00 $ Indicate year(s): ______, ______ Note: Not available for years prior to 1999. GRAND TOTAL/CENSUS DATA ITEMS 2 $ July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL CENSUS DATA ORDER FORM ITEM DESCRIPTIONS • Unless otherwise specified, reports using Census data are available beginning with 1990. Census data generally become available in the second quarter of the current year, and data through calendar year 2003 are now available. Please refer to the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 4522016, email at HMDAHELP@FRB.GOV, or Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda for the latest release of these reports. • There is an additional charge for each year requested. Census Information and Census Data on CD-ROM: This is the nationwide census data used as input to HMDA and CRA processing. Beginning with 1996, this information combines HMDA and CRA data elements into one source. Data are distributed on cartridge tape or CD-ROM. (Beginning with the release of 2004 Census data in the second quarter of 2004, distribution on cartridge tape will no longer be offered.) A file description is included with each order. The CD-ROM, with software for the PC, contains the same data as the cartridge. It also includes printable reports and an option to export data to spreadsheet or text formats. Four items previously listed on the order form, the Census Tract Listing (Item #003), MA Median Family Income Listing (Item #004), Counties Located in Non-Metro Areas Listing (Item #004a), and Census--Geography Only (Item #105), can be produced from the CD-ROM. Those interested in this data for years prior to 1999 should call the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. The charge for tape distribution is $250.00 (Item #104). The charge for the CD-ROM is $10.00 (Item #303). The 1980 census tracts were used in processing 1990 and 1991 HMDA data; 1990 census tracts were used for processing data for 1992 thru 2002 data; 1990 MA redefinitions were used beginning with 1994 HMDA data; 2000 census tracts were used for processing data for 2003 and subsequent years. The census data distributed is consistent with the HMDA year specified. For example, if HMDA year 1991 is selected, 1980 census tract data with 1991 MA definitions are issued. 3 July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM (HARDCOPY ITEMS) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ________ SELECTION LIST There is an additional charge for each year/MA/institution requested (see attached item descriptions) UNIT COST TOTAL $ 50.00 QTY $ $ 50.00 $ Disclosure Statement (Item #001) Data Type (see page 10): HMDA____, MICA____ Indicate year(s): ______, ______ (Specify Respondent ID selections in ascending order; use back of form if additional space is required.) Indicate Institution Name: Respondent/Agency ID and Zip Code: Institution Name: __________________________ /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/-/_/ Zip Code: /_/_/_/_/_/ Institution Name: __________________________ /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/-/_/ Zip Code: /_/_/_/_/_/ Note: Hardcopy item. Not available for years 1997 and thereafter. Cost of hardcopy report by institution is $50 per year/institution. MA by MA Report on the Disposition of Applications by Race and Income of Each Applicant (Item #006) Data Type (see page 10): HMDA____, MICA____ Indicate year(s): ______, ______ 4 July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM (HARDCOPY ITEMS) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ________ SELECTION LIST There is an additional charge for each year/MA/institution requested (see attached item descriptions) QTY UNIT COST TOTAL Reporter Directory (Item #007) $ 45.00 or $ 75.00 Indicate HMDA year(s): ______, ______ $ $ 45.00 or $ 75.00 $ Indicate MA Name and Number: MA Name: ________________________ MA Number: /_/_/_/_/ Note: For non-profit organizations, the charge for the directory is $45.00 per MA; the charge is $75.00 per MA for all others. Three-report Package (Item #008): Report on Disposition of Loan Applications by Income and Race Report on Distribution of Loan Applications Census Tract Summary Indicate HMDA year(s): ______, ______ Indicate Institution and MA Name: Institution Name: ____________________________ MA Name: ______________ Institution Name: ____________________________ MA Name: ______________ Respondent/Agency ID and MA Number (if known): /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/-/_/ MA Number: /_/_/_/_/ /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/-/_/ MA Number: /_/_/_/_/ Note: For non-profit organizations, the charge for this package is $45.00 per institution/MA; the charge is $75.00 per institution/MA for all others. GRAND TOTAL/HMDA HARDCOPY ITEMS 5 $ July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM (ELECTRONIC ITEMS) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ________ SELECTION LIST There is an additional charge for each year requested (see attached item descriptions) QTY UNIT COST TOTAL $500.00 (cartridge) OR $50.00 (CD-ROM only) Indicate year(s): ______, ______, ______ $ $150.00 (cartridge) ____ LAR & TS Raw Data (Item #102) $ Data Type (see page 10): HMDA____, MICA____ Select: __ Cartridge in __ EBCDIC or __ ASCII OR __ CD-ROM (LAR & TS Raw Data Only)* *Not available for 1995 HMDA reporting year or years prior to 1992. Not available for MICA years prior to 1995. ____ Reporter Panel (Item #103) Indicate year(s): ______, ______, ______ Data Type (see page 10): HMDA____, MICA____ Select: __ Cartridge in __ EBCDIC or __ ASCII Note: Included on the LAR & TS Raw Data CD-ROM for 1997 and years thereafter. $10.00 Aggregate and Disclosure Reports on CD-ROM (Item #302) $ Indicate year(s): ______, ______ Data Type (see page 10): HMDA____, MICA____ Note: Not available for 1993 HMDA years or years prior to 1992. Not available for MICA years prior to 1994. GRAND TOTAL/HMDA ELECTRONIC ITEMS 6 $ July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM (PREPARATION ITEMS) FFIEC AND FRB USE ONLY FFIEC Account/Order Number: ________ SELECTION LIST There is an additional charge for each year requested (see attached item descriptions) QTY UNIT COST TOTAL $ $ 5.00 A Guide to HMDA Reporting: Getting It Right! Note: The most current edition dated January 1, 2003, is only available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. The 1998 edition, which is the previous comprehensive edition, is available in paper format (#010) or on the Internet. GRAND TOTAL/HMDA PREPARATION ITEMS 7 $ July 2003 FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL HMDA DATA ORDER FORM ITEM DESCRIPTIONS • Unless otherwise specified, reports using HMDA data are available beginning with 1990. HMDA data generally become available by August of the year following the reporting year, and data through calendar year 2002 are now available. Reports using census data and the HUD Median Family Income Listings become available earlier in the year. Please refer to the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016, email at HMDAHELP@FRB.GOV, or Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda for the latest release of these reports. • There is an additional charge for each year, MA, and/or institution requested. • Charges for duplicate requests apply. The FFIEC has contracted with the Mortgage Insurance Companies of America (MICA) to compile data on mortgage insurance applications for the nation's eight private mortgage insurance companies. (Beginning in 1999, there are seven companies.) These data are available beginning with data for the fourth quarter of calendar year 1993 and for calendar years 1994 through 2002. The FFIEC makes the data available in formats similar to those for the HMDA data. The following items are available for MICA data: Disclosure Statements (Item #001); Aggregate Reports (Item #002); the National Aggregate Report (Item #005); MA by MA Report on the Disposition of Applications by Race and Income of Each Applicant (Item #006); LAR & TS Raw Data (Item #102); Reporter Panel (Item #103); and Aggregate and Disclosure Reports on CD-ROM (Item #302). Because 1993 MICA data cover only the fourth quarter, the charge for the LAR & TS Raw Data (Item #102) is $125. Subsequent years' data are collected annually, and therefore, charges do not differ from the FFIEC data. Items other than the LAR & TS Raw Data do not have a reduced price for the 1993 reporting year. When ordering items, be sure to specify the data type. The FFIEC data include those institutions required to report HMDA under Regulation C, and the MICA data include the mortgage insurers reporting HMDA data as agreed upon with the FFIEC. Aggregate Report: This report is sorted by MA. For years prior to 1996, the report aggregates the mortgage and home improvement lending information within an MA, where an institution has a home or branch office in that MA. For 1996 and years thereafter, the report aggregates the mortgage and home improvement lending information within an MA, regardless of whether the institution has a home or branch office in that MA. It is in the same format as the disclosure statement; however, individual institution’s data cannot be identified. The Aggregate Reports are distributed in hardcopy only for years 1990 – 1996 at a cost of $50 for each MA requested (Item #002). Those interested in the Aggregate Reports for years prior to 1997 should contact the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. For 1997 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. For an electronic version, see Item #302 below. The Aggregate Reports are also available for MICA data, however, they are not available prior to 1993 (see above). Hardcopy reports are only available for years 1993 – 1999 at a cost of $50. For 2000 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. Those interested in the hardcopy version should contact the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. A Guide to HMDA Reporting: Getting It Right: The Guide was developed to assist those who prepare the HMDA report for their institutions. It also contains an executive summary for management officials that explain the responsibilities of institutions that are subject to HMDA. The Guide provides a summary of responsibilities and requirements, directions for assembling the necessary tools, and step-by-step instructions for reporting HMDA data. It includes information about obtaining data from the Bureau of the Census, and contains a listing of MA, state, and county codes. Appendices include Regulation C: the Instructions for Completion of the HMDA-LAR; Form and Instructions for Data Collection on Race or National Origin and Sex; and the Staff Commentary on Regulation C. The 1998 edition of the HMDA Guide was the last time that it was completely rewritten and offered in paper format. A Guide Information Letter that highlighted the major changes for a particular processing year was added to the FFIEC web site for each year from 1999 through 2002. The 1998 edition along with the appropriate year’s information letter were used for guidance on collection and reporting HMDA data. Thus, if you must file HMDA data prior to calendar year 2003, the 1998 edition is available in paper format (Item #010) or from the web at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. The most recent edition of the HMDA Guide dated January 1, 2003 is only available via the web (www.ffiec.gov/hmda). It contains minor differences from the 1998 edition and is to be used for collecting and processing calendar year 2003 data. 8 July 2003 Disclosure Statement: The Disclosure Statement summarizes mortgage and home improvement lending information from data that are prepared yearly by individual institutions. For 1996 and years thereafter, a supplemental report discloses data for property located outside of MAs in which the institution has a home or branch office. The Disclosure Statement is distributed in hardcopy only for years 1990 - 1996 at a cost of $50.00 for each institution requested (Item #001). Those interested in the Disclosure Statement for years prior to 1997 should contact the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. For an electronic version, see Item #302 below. For 1997 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. The Disclosure Statements are also available for MICA data, however, they are not available prior to 1993 (see page 10). Hardcopy reports are only available for years 1993 – 1999 at a cost of $50. For 2000 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. Those interested in the hardcopy version should contact the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. Loan Application Register (LAR) and Transmittal Sheet (TS) Raw Data: The LAR & TS data are collected by a financial institution as a result of applications for, and originations and purchases of, home-purchase loans (including refinances) and home-improvement loans for each calendar year. The 2002 LARs data total over 31 million records and 7,771 TSs. The following should be noted: • Data are not certified as error free. • For reasons of privacy, the two date fields and loan application numbers are omitted from each record. • To form a unique identifier for an institution, the Respondent ID and single character Agency Code must be used. To form a unique loan record identifier, the Respondent ID, Agency Code, and Loan Sequence Number must be used. See record layout enclosed with distribution tape for additional information. LAR and TS data are distributed on cartridge at a cost of $500.00 (Item #102). File specifications are included with each order. If cartridges are ordered, there are several cartridges containing the LAR data and one containing the TS data. (The number of cartridges containing LAR data vary according to the year requested because of the volume of data.) Note that cartridges containing LAR data are multi-volume datasets. This means that to process ALL of the LAR data, each of the cartridges must be read successively. LAR and TS data are also distributed on CD-ROM at a cost of $50.00. The HMDA Raw Data Software System moved from a DOS-based to a Windows-based application as of 1995. For 1997 and years thereafter, most of the Reporter Panel (Item #103) information that can be ordered on cartridge is included on the CD-ROM. However, if you wish to order all of the reporter panel data elements on cartridge in one file, refer to Item #103. The user has the ability to do the following: • Download the data contained on the compact discs to a file. • Search by MA, State, County, or Respondent ID and save to a file. • Import the file created from a download or search into a software package or mainframe application. It is important to consider the space limitations of each application prior to loading the data into that application. These LAR and TS files are also available for MICA data beginning with the fourth quarter of 1993. The 1993 MICA data are available at a cost of $125 and are only available on cartridge (see page 10). Aggregate and Disclosure Reports on CD-ROM: The Aggregate Reports and individual lender Disclosure Statements for each MA are available on CD-ROM at a cost of $10.00 for the entire nation. (Item #302) The HMDA Aggregate and Disclosure Reports Software System moved from a DOS-based to a Windows-based application as of 1996. The Software allows the user to search an institution's individual disclosure statement by MA, or a specific table on the MA aggregate report. Printing these records requires a printer featured for 166 character output. The Aggregate and Disclosure Reports on CD-ROM are also available for MICA data. These data are not available prior to 1994 (see page 10). 9 July 2003 MA by MA Report on the Disposition of Applications by Race and Income of Each Applicant: This report contains one table for each of the MAs. For years prior to 1996, the report provides the number and percentage of applications denied by the race and income of the applicants within the MA, where an institution has a home or branch office in that MA. For 1996 and years thereafter, it provides the number and percentage of applications denied by the race and income of the applicants within the MA, regardless of whether the institution has a home or branch office in that MA. The report is available in hardcopy only at a cost of $50.00. (Item #006) These reports are also available for MICA data. These data are not available prior to 1994 (see page 10). National Aggregate Reports: These reports are a nationwide summation of the individual MA Aggregate Reports. They indicate the number and dollar amounts of lending, cross tabulated by loan, applicant, and geographic characteristics. For 1997 and years thereafter, data are available on the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. They are distributed in hardcopy for years 1990 – 1996 at a cost of $50.00 (Item #005). Those interested in the hardcopy version of the National Aggregates should contact the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. The National Aggregate Reports are also available for MICA data; however, they are not available prior to 1993 (see page 10). Hardcopy reports are only available for years 1993 – 1999 at a cost of $50.00. For 2000 and years thereafter, data are available via the Internet at www.ffiec.gov/hmda. Those interested in the hardcopy version of the National Aggregates should contact the HMDA Assistance Line at (202) 452-2016. Reporter Directory: This is a hardcopy of all HMDA reporters within a specified MA, sorted by name of reporter and then by state and county codes. The charge for non-profit organizations is $45 per requested MA and $75 per MA for all others. (Item #007) This report provides the following information: • • ID number, name of institution, city and state locations, total assets, and parent ID number. For each state and county in which an institution has activity ------- the state and county codes; the number of tracts with loans; the number of loans originated; the number of applications; the ratio of loans to applications; and the number of loans purchased Reporter Panel: This is the universe of all institutions that reported under HMDA. The panel information is taken from the database at the same time that the final disclosure and aggregate reports are prepared for the Central Depositories. Beginning in 1997, some of the panel data elements (the name of the institution, the Respondent ID and agency code, and the MA number(s) of the metropolitan areas for which they reported) are included on the LAR & TS Raw Data CD-ROM (Item #102). If you prefer to obtain all of the Reporter Panel information, i.e., the same data elements found on the CD-ROM as well as the reporter’s agency group code and parent information (if applicable), you can order the complete reporter panel information cartridge at a cost of $150.00. A format description is also included with each order. (Item #103). The Reporter Panel is also available for MICA data. These data are not available prior to 1994 (see page 10). 10 July 2003 Three-Report Package: This package of three reports is available in hardcopy only. The charge for non-profit organizations are priced at $45 per requested institution/MA, and $75 per institution/MA for all others. These reports are ordered as a package, not separately. (Item #008) The following information is provided for a specified institution/MA combination: Report on Disposition of Loan Applications by Income and Race • Compares applications by disposition and by income levels (as a percentage of the MA median income--less than 80%, 80-99%, 100-120%, and more than 120%) • Is subdivided by race Report on Distribution of Loan Applications • Provides a summary of a specific institution's activity by income and racial characteristics of the census tract within an MA. • Covers applications for mortgage and home improvement loans and refinances. • Provides the number of applications received, the number of loans originated, and the number of 1-4 family owner-occupied units within each category of census tract characteristics. Census Tract Summary • Provides the number, dollar amounts, and disposition of applications for a specific institution/MA by census tracts • For each census tract, the following are also provided: -the median housing value -the median age of the housing stock -the median age of the population -the minority population percentage -the number of owner-occupied units -the number of households -the median income (adjusted) -the denial rate • Census tracts that are low- to moderate-income tracts are highlighted 11 July 2003
@FedFRASER