Full text of HAMP Performance Summary : Making Home Affordable Program : Program Performance Report, Through July 2011

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Report Highlights

Inside:

Number of Permanent Modifications Exceeds 790,000

SUMMARY RESULTS:

• Seventy-five percent of eligible homeowners entering a HAMP trial modification
since June 1, 2010 received a permanent modification, with an average trial period
of 3.5 months.
• Homeowners in active first lien permanent modifications save a median of $525
each month, or 37% of the median before-modification payment. Program to date,
homeowners in permanent modifications have realized aggregate savings in
monthly mortgage payments of nearly $7.8 billion.

First Lien Modification Activity
First Lien Modification Characteristics/
Treasury-FHA HAMP Activity
Activity for HAFA, PRA and UP
Second Lien Modification Activity
HAMP Activity by State
HAMP Activity by MSA/
Homeowner Outreach
Aged Trials

This Month: Servicer Assessment Results
• The Obama Administration continues its commitment to transparency with the
release of the second installment of quarterly Servicer Assessments.
• For the second quarter of 2011, two servicers have been determined to need
substantial improvement. These servicers were also in need of substantial
improvement in the first quarter, and their servicer incentives will continue to be
withheld.
• Three servicers met the established benchmarks for program compliance,
indicating that they require just minor improvement on the areas reviewed for the
second quarter. Five servicers were found to need moderate improvement.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

SERVICER RESULTS:
Modification Activity by Servicer
Trial Length
Conversion Rate
Disposition of Homeowners Not in
HAMP
Homeowner Experience
Modifications by Investor Type

9
10
11
12-13
14
15

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Overview
Servicer Results
Description of Metrics

16-18
19-38
39

APPENDICES:
Participants in MHA Programs

40-41

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

HAMP Activity: First Lien Modifications

HAMP Trials Started
Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

Total

Trial
Modifications

Permanent
Modifications

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2

2,566,583
1,023,106

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3

1,892,006

All Trials Started

1,661,461

Trials Reported Since June 2011 Report4

22,079

Trial Modifications Canceled (Cumulative)

763,984

Active Trials

106,078

All Permanent Modifications Started

791,399

Permanent Modifications Reported Since
June 2011 Report

28,328

Permanent Modifications Canceled
(Cumulative)5

115,952

Active Permanent Modifications

675,447

1 Estimated

eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of June 30, 2011, include conventional loans:
 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.
 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a one-unit property, $934,200 on a two-unit property,
$1,129,250 on a three-unit property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.
 on a property that was owner-occupied at origination.
 originated on or before January 1, 2009.
Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans exclude:
 FHA and VA loans.
 loans that are current or less than 60 days delinquent, which may be eligible for HAMP if a borrower is in imminent
default.
2 The estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers are those in HAMP-eligible loans, minus estimated exclusions of
loans on vacant properties, loans with borrower debt-to-income ratio below 31%, loans that fail the NPV test,
properties no longer owner-occupied, unemployed borrowers, manufactured housing loans with title/chattel issues
that exclude them from HAMP, loans where the investor pooling and servicing agreements preclude modification, and
trial and permanent modifications disqualified from HAMP. Exclusions for DTI and NPV results are estimated using
market analytics.
3 As reported in the weekly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through July 28, 2011.
4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime.
5 A permanent modification is canceled when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Includes
1,796 loans paid off.

Note: Unless specified, exhibits in this report refer to HAMP first lien modification activity.

All Trials Started (000s)

(As of June 30, 2011)

Eligible Delinquent Loans1

1,500

1,208

1,200

1,257

1,283 1,305

1,330

1,353

1,384

1,415

1,446

1,481

1,511

1,544

1,576

1,647 1,661
1,605 1,627

1,138
1,050

100

955

900

600

300

0
Dec 2009

Mar 2010

June

Sep

Dec

Mar 2011

June

Source: HAMP system of record. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any
time. For example, 22,079 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; of those, 14,419 were
trials with a first payment recorded in July 2011.

Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)
800
All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

HAMP Eligibility

200

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

New Trials Started (000s)

1,800

HAMP is designed to lower monthly mortgage payments to help struggling
homeowners stay in their homes and prevent avoidable foreclosure.

699

700
600
500
398

400

468

496

550

580

763 791

670

347
299

300

231

200
100

435

520

608 634

731

170
67

117

0
Dec 2009

Mar 2010

Source: HAMP system of record.

June

Sep

Dec

Mar 2011

June

2

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics
• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active
permanent modifications are:

• Aggregate savings to homeowners who received HAMP
first lien permanent modifications are estimated to
total nearly $7.8 billion, program to date, compared
with unmodified mortgage obligations.

• 61.4% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or
unemployment)
• 11.2% reported excessive obligation
• 2.9% reported an illness of the principal borrower

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active
permanent first lien modifications is $524.96, or 37% of
the median monthly payment before modification.

• Active permanent modifications feature the following
modification steps:

• Of trial modifications started, 79% of homeowners were at
least 60 days delinquent at trial start. The rest were up to 59
days delinquent or current and in imminent default.

• 99.0% feature interest rate reductions1
• 59.5% offer term extension
• 30.7% include principal forbearance
1

Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications

Loan Characteristic

Before
After
Modification Modification

Median
Decrease

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio1

45.2%

31.0%

-14.2 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2

78.4%

61.6%

-14.7 pct pts

$1,427.90

$832.24

-$524.96

Median Monthly Housing
Payment3

Effective July 2011, the methodology for reporting interest rate reduction has been updated.

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity
The Treasury FHA-HAMP Program provides assistance to eligible homeowners
with FHA-insured mortgages.
All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started

5,721

Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started

4,072

1

Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo
fees) to monthly gross income.
2 Ratio of total monthly debt payments (including mortgage principal and interest, taxes, insurance, homeowners
association and/or condo fees, plus payments on installment debts, junior liens, alimony, car lease payments and
investment property payments) to monthly gross income. Borrowers who have a back-end debt-to-income ratio of
greater than 55% are required to seek housing counseling under program guidelines.
3 Principal and interest payment.

3

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

HAFA Activity by Servicer

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity
The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA) offers incentives for
homeowners looking to exit their homes through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of
foreclosure. HAFA has established important homeowner protections and an industry
standard for streamlined transactions. In 21% of HAFA agreements started, the
homeowner began a HAMP trial modification but later requested a HAFA agreement
or was disqualified from HAMP.

Agreements
Started1

Agreements
Completed

Bank of America, NA2

2,824

1,873

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank NA3

10,191

4,621

Servicer

All HAFA Agreements Started1

25,716

Litton Loan Servicing LP

1,218

581

HAFA Agreements Active

10,428

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

1,417

674

HAFA Transactions Completed

12,888

Wells Fargo Bank, NA4

7,002

3,609

12,514

All Other Servicers

3,064

1,530

Total

25,716

12,888

Completed Transactions – Short Sale
Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu

374

1 Servicer

agreement with homeowner for terms of potential short sale, which lasts at least 120 days; or agreement for a
deed-in-lieu transaction. A short sale requires a third-party purchaser and cooperation of junior lienholders and mortgage
insurers to complete the transaction. All HAFA Agreements Started include HAFA Agreements Active, HAFA
Transactions Completed, and HAFA Transactions Canceled.

Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) Activity
The Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) requires servicers of non-GSE loans to
evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for mortgages with a loan-to-value ratio of
115% or greater when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP first lien modification.
While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for PRA, they are not required to
reduce principal as part of the modification. PRA may be a feature of a HAMP trial or
permanent modification.

All PRA Trial Modifications Started

29,406

PRA Trial Modifications Active

18,404

All PRA Permanent Modifications Started

9,355

PRA Permanent Modifications Active

9,221

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent
Modifications

$67,735

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent
Modifications (%)2

30.4%

2 PRA

amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization.

1 Servicer

agreement with homeowner for terms of potential short sale, which lasts at least 120 days; or agreement for a deed-inlieu transaction. A short sale requires a third-party purchaser and cooperation of junior lienholders and mortgage insurers to
complete the transaction. All HAFA Agreements Started include HAFA Agreements Active, HAFA Transactions Completed, and HAFA
Transactions Canceled.
2 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit
Corporation.
3 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity
The Treasury Unemployment Program (UP) provides a temporary
forbearance to homeowners who are unemployed. Treasury recently
announced that unemployed homeowners must be considered for a
minimum of 12 months’ forbearance.
All UP Forbearance Plans Started (Through June 2011)

13,521

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required

10,881

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required

2,640

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through June 30, 2011.

4

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity
The Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) provides assistance to homeowners in
a first lien permanent modification who have an eligible second lien with a
participating servicer. This assistance can result in a modification of the second lien
and even full or partial extinguishment of the second lien. 2MP requires that the
first lien modification be permanent and active and that the second lien have an
unpaid balance of more than $5,000 and a monthly payment of $100 or greater.

All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1
Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien
Extinguishments
Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2
Active Second Lien Modifications

Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)
40,000

Second Lien Loan Modifications3

28,373
24,937

30,000

21,277

20,000

37,466
3,516

673

992 1,453 2,121

3,981

5,610

0

422
33,528

9,589

10,000

Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug
2010
2011
Note: Includes second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for
July 2011 data, though the effective date may occur in August. Number of modifications is net of cancellations,
which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

Second Lien Modification Activity by Servicer

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:

Second Lien Partially Extinguished

37,466
35,439
32,404

Second Lien
Modifications
Started

Full Ext.

DQ1

Active Partial Ext./
Terms Modified

Bank of America, NA2

15,708

1,377

189

14,142

CitiMortgage, Inc

5,592

1,349

32

4,211

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

1,991

297

1

1,693

1,356
32,172

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Servicer

Average Amount of Full Extinguishment

$67,251

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank
NA3

4,751

0

80

4,671

Average Amount of Partial Extinguishment

$6,362

Wells Fargo Bank, NA4

7,882

216

111

7,555

Other SPA Servicers

1,542

277

9

1,256

Total

37,466

3,516

422

33,528

1 Includes

second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for July
2011 data, though the effective date may occur in August. Number of modifications is net of cancellations,
which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
2 Includes 54 loans paid off.
3 Second lien modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate reduction, term
extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

See Appendix A2 for servicer participants in additional Making Home Affordable programs.

Note: Number of modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
1 Includes second liens paid off.
2 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit
Corporation.
3 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

5

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

HAMP Activity by State

State

% of
U.S.
Active Permanent
State HAMP
Trials Modifications Total1 Activity State

Modification Activity by State

% of
U.S.
Active Permanent State HAMP
Trials Modifications Total1 Activity

AK

62

283

345

0.0%

MT

123

771

894

0.1%

AL

618

3,871

4,489

0.6%

NC

1,841

12,254

14,095

1.8%

AR

243

1,442

1,685

0.2%

ND

18

113

131

0.0%

AZ

3,606

30,692

34,298

4.4%

NE

129

940

1,069

0.1%

CA

25,954

164,051

190,005

24.3%

NH

470

3,120

3,590

0.5%

CO

1,274

9,364

10,638

1.4%

NJ

3,464

21,781

25,245

3.2%

CT

1,299

8,452

9,751

1.2%

NM

394

2,186

2,580

0.3%

DC

163

1,145

1,308

0.2%

NV

2,532

17,180

19,712

2.5%

DE

312

2,096

2,408

0.3%

NY

5,436

31,089

36,525

4.7%

FL

13,994

79,995

93,989

12.0%

OH

2,391

14,873

17,264

2.2%

GA

3,952

24,491

28,443

3.6%

OK

268

1,556

1,824

0.2%

HI

409

2,580

2,989

0.4%

OR

1,112

7,371

8,483

1.1%

IA

265

1,724

1,989

0.3%

PA

2,227

14,014

16,241

2.1%

ID

405

2,585

2,990

0.4%

RI

496

3,568

4,064

0.5%

IL

5,548

36,144

41,692

5.3%

SC

985

6,343

7,328

0.9%

IN

1,059

6,520

7,579

1.0%

SD

27

263

290

0.0%

KS

252

1,623

1,875

0.2%

TN

1,164

6,938

8,102

1.0%

KY

427

2,548

2,975

0.4%

TX

3,058

17,660

20,718

2.7%

LA

698

3,660

4,358

0.6%

UT

893

6,395

7,288

0.9%

MA

2,355

16,894

19,249

2.5%

VA

2,173

16,430

18,603

2.4%

MD

3,162

21,651

24,813

3.2%

VT

103

573

676

0.1%

ME

325

1,853

2,178

0.3%

WA

2,254

13,444

15,698

2.0%

MI

3,330

21,853

25,183

3.2%

WI

1,026

6,573

7,599

1.0%

MN

1,445

11,706

13,151

1.7%

WV

131

993

1,124

0.1%

MO

1,163

6,977

8,140

1.0%

WY

52

348

400

0.1%

MS

390

2,552

2,942

0.4%

Other2

601

1,919

2,520

0.3%

1

Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.
2 Includes Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

HAMP Modifications
Note: Includes active trial and permanent
modifications from the official HAMP system of
record.

5,000 and lower

20,001 – 35,000

5,001 – 10,000

35,001 and higher

10,001 – 20,000

Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State

Source: 2nd Quarter 2011
National Delinquency
Survey, Mortgage
Bankers Association.

60+ Day Delinquency Rate
5.0% and lower

10.01% - 15.0%

20.01%

5.01% - 10.0%

15.01% - 20.0%

and higher

6

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Call Center Volume

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana,
CA
New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario,
CA
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI

Total MSA % of U.S.
HAMP
HAMP
Activity
Activity

Active
Trials

Permanent
Modifications

7,941

48,711

56,652

7.2%

6,950

42,007

48,957

6.3%

5,025

35,355

40,380

5.2%

5,362

35,002

40,364

5.2%

Program to
Date

July

Total Number of Calls Taken at
1-888-995-HOPE

2,402,011

70,835

Borrowers Receiving Free Housing
Counseling Assistance Through the
Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

1,142,754

29,405

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline.

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano
Beach, FL

5,993

32,510

38,503

4.9%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ

2,797

25,059

27,856

3.6%

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria,
DC-VA-MD-WV

3,047

23,170

26,217

3.4%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA

3,141

19,754

22,895

2.9%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV

2,105

14,113

16,218

2.1%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA

2,394

13,133

15,527

2.0%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI

2,045

13,232

15,277

2.0%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA

2,067

12,485

14,552

1.9%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH

1,683

12,126

13,809

1.8%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA

1,796

11,775

13,571

1.7%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville,
CA

1,802

11,490

13,292

1.7%

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures
Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by
Treasury and Partners (cumulative)
Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events
(cumulative)

57

57,578

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1

7,700,371

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov
(July 2011)

1,727,953

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative)

122,913,503

1

Source: Survey data provided by SPA servicers. Servicers are encouraged by HAMP to solicit information from
borrowers 60+ days delinquent, regardless of eligibility for a HAMP modification.

Note: Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

A complete list of HAMP activity for all metropolitan areas is available at
http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/results/MHA-Reports/

7

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Aged Trials1

200,000

190,412

The number of active trials lasting 6 months or longer has remained near 23,000.
165,543

Program guidance directs servicers to cancel or convert trial modifications after three
or four monthly payments, depending on circumstances.

150,000

117,574
94,269

100,000

76,502

69,418
49,229

50,000

39,753

36,184

32,017

26,362

25,390

23,552

23,014

23,061

March

April

May

June

July

0

May 2010

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan 2011

Feb

Trials Lasting 6 Months or Longer At End of Month
1 Active

trials initiated at least six months ago. See page 9 for number of aged trials by servicer. These figures include trial modifications that have been
converted to permanent modifications by the servicer and are pending reporting to the HAMP system of record plus some portion which may be
canceled.

8

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer
As of
June 30, 2011

Cumulative

As of July 31, 2011

All HAMP
Trials
Started3

All HAMP
Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Trial
Modifications
Reported Since
June 2011
Report3

Active Trial
Modifications3

Active Trial
Modifications
Lasting 6
Months or
Longer4

Active
Permanent
Modifications3

37,788

34,296

27,040

708

2,597

378

22,984

251,997

511,184

406,537

155,317

5,286

31,815

9,950

132,763

CitiMortgage, Inc.

74,560

182,010

131,003

53,761

656

5,166

2,053

47,048

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

27,649

76,003

62,897

45,519

778

3,202

56

38,559

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA6

163,514

320,747

261,188

113,125

4,628

19,742

3,974

92,932

Litton Loan Servicing LP

33,689

43,081

37,868

12,040

279

2,539

315

9,582

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

38,198

49,162

46,539

35,818

1,088

3,029

513

27,821

OneWest Bank

33,962

71,129

54,527

29,643

858

4,177

222

26,309

Select Portfolio Servicing

4,750

68,154

42,132

22,796

185

845

45

18,928

Estimated
Eligible 60+
Day Delinquent
Borrowers1

Trial Plan
Offers
Extended2

American Home Mortgage Servicing
Inc.

40,035

Bank of America, NA5

Servicer

Wells Fargo Bank, NA7

127,686

323,086

236,869

107,059

2,203

11,487

1,265

93,917

Other SPA Servicers8

94,515

209,662

214,425

107,818

3,118

9,901

1,351

93,265

Other GSE Servicers9

132,551

NA

133,180

81,463

2,292

11,578

2,939

71,339

1,023,106

1,892,006

1,661,461

791,399

22,079

106,078

23,061

675,447

Total
1 Estimated

eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers as reported by
servicers as of June 30, 2011, include those in conventional loans:
 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.
 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a
one-unit property, $934,200 on a two-unit property, $1,129,250 on
a three-unit property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.
 on a property that was owner-occupied at origination.
 originated on or before January 1, 2009.
Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers exclude:
 Those in FHA and VA loans.
 Those in loans that are current or less than 60 days delinquent,
which may be eligible for HAMP if a borrower is in imminent
default.
 Those borrowers with debt-to-income ratios less than 31% or a
negative NPV test.

 Owners of vacant properties or properties otherwise excluded.
 HAMP Trials and Permanent Modifications disqualified from
HAMP.
 Unemployed borrowers.
Exclusions for DTI and NPV are estimated using market analytics.
2 As reported in the weekly servicer survey of large SPA servicers
through July 28, 2011.
3 As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes
FHA-HAMP modifications. Subject to adjustment based on servicer
reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing
transfers. In cases where servicing transfers exceed new trial
modifications reported, negative numbers are not presented.
Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of
record at any time.
4 These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to

permanent modifications by the servicer and are pending reporting
to the HAMP system of record plus some portion which may be
canceled.
5 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home
Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit
Corporation.
6 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
7 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under
Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
8 Other SPA servicers are entities excluding the 10 largest servicers, by
cap amount, that have signed participation agreements with
Treasury and Fannie Mae. A full list of participating servicers is in
Appendix A.
9 Includes servicers of loans owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac. Includes GSE loans transferred from SPA servicers.

9

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Length of Trial Upon Conversion1
9

The average length of the trial period for those converted to a permanent
HAMP modification has decreased from 5.3 months for trials started prior to
June 1, 2010, to 3.5 months for trials started June 1, 2010 or later.

8

7

Months

6

5

4.6

4

3

3.0

3.5

3.3

3.7

3.3

3.0

3.2

3.0

3.5

3.3

3.2

2

1

0
Am. Home Servicing

Bank of America

CitiMortgage

Trials Started Before 6/1/10

GMAC

JP Morgan Chase

Litton

Trials Started On/After 6/1/10

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Before 6/1/10 Average (5.3)

Wells Fargo

Other GSE servicers Other SPA Servicers

On/After 6/1/10 Average (3.5)

1 For all permanent modifications started. Note: Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010 all trials must be started using verified income. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers
initiated trials using stated income information.

10

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Conversion Rate1
Of Trials Started Before 6/1/10:
42% Converted to Permanent Modification
0.4% Pending Processing or Decision
100%

86%

Following the implementation of verified income
documentation in June 2010, rates of converting trial
modifications into permanent modifications have
substantially risen.

Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10:
75% Converted to Permanent Modification
15% Pending Processing or Decision

88%

80%

80%

80%

76%
68%

79%

78%

81%

64%

64%

Conversion Rate

85%

60%

40%

20%

0%
Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase

Litton

Average of Trials Started Before 6/1/10 (42%)

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

Other GSE
Servicers

Other SPA
Servicers

Average of Trials Started On/After 6/1/10 (75%)

1 Per

program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010 all trials must be started using verified income. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers initiated trials using stated income information.
Chart depicts conversion rates as measured against trials eligible to convert – those three months in trial, or four months if the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial
modification start. Permanent modifications transferred among servicers are credited to the originating servicer. Trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current servicer’s
population.

11

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Disposition Path
Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through June 2011 (10 Largest Servicers)
Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled Who Are in the Process of:

Action
Pending1

Servicer
American Home
Mortgage Servicing Inc.

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy Borrower
in Process Current

Short Sale/
Total
Alternative Payment
Deed-in- Foreclosure Foreclosure (As of June
Modification
Plan2 Loan Payoff
Lieu
Starts
Completions
2011)

289

69

190

2,571

37

163

277

659

105

4,360

39,394

7,995

29,621

70,679

2,005

3,791

15,865

30,767

13,078

213,195

CitiMortgage Inc.

16,829

3,651

5,549

28,915

990

1,452

1,736

9,456

2,053

70,631

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

1,689

401

1,077

5,855

178

435

962

1,715

1,551

13,863

JP Morgan Chase Bank
NA4

7,181

797

4,405

55,533

477

5,735

7,006

24,067

11,760

116,961

Litton Loan Servicing LP

1,503

588

1,849

13,374

228

173

1,374

1,486

923

21,498

Ocwen Loan Servicing,
LLC

441

126

438

2,871

444

37

351

1,963

614

7,285

OneWest Bank

415

694

683

10,322

279

40

1,133

3,575

3,542

20,683

Select Portfolio
Servicing

1,345

500

1,407

5,449

358

375

1,340

1,847

3,013

15,634

Wells Fargo Bank NA5

1,483

787

12,953

56,524

1,364

14,659

3,392

16,378

10,669

118,209

TOTAL
(These 10 Largest
Servicers)

70,569
11.7%

15,608
2.6%

58,172
9.7%

252,093
41.9%

6,360
1.1%

26,860
4.5%

33,436
5.6%

91,913
15.3%

47,308
7.9%

602,319
100.0%

Bank of America,

NA3

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through June 30, 2011. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record.
1 Trial loans that have been canceled, but no further action has yet been taken.
2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification.
3 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
4 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
5 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
Note: Excludes cancellations pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios.

The most common causes of
trial cancellations from all
servicers are:
• Insufficient documentation
• Trial plan payment default
• Ineligible borrower:
first lien housing expense is
already below 31% of
household income

12

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Disposition Path
Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through June 2011 (10 Largest Servicers)
Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification Who Are in the Process of:

Servicer

Action
Pending1

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy Borrower
in Process Current

Short Sale/
Total
Alternative Payment
Deed-in- Foreclosure Foreclosure (As of June
Modification
Plan2 Loan Payoff
Lieu
Starts
Completions
2011)

American Home
Mortgage Servicing Inc.

1,876

1,135

9,270

33,174

950

1,206

1,859

7,313

1,184

57,967

Bank of America, NA3

72,245

13,184

121,456

75,627

6,638

6,375

31,003

67,197

26,255

419,980

CitiMortgage Inc.

22,704

8,771

21,087

25,839

5,003

14,663

1,679

7,020

6,780

113,546

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

22,516

5,648

34,467

35,739

2,726

3,629

7,534

15,984

12,299

140,542

JP Morgan Chase Bank
NA4

86,982

5,998

86,448

128,320

1,962

54,068

24,763

68,627

19,948

477,116

Litton Loan Servicing LP

7,271

3,120

10,959

19,928

907

775

4,861

6,528

4,157

58,506

Ocwen Loan Servicing,
LLC

5,753

1,345

27,726

29,705

4,313

121

384

4,084

1,971

75,402

OneWest Bank

5,056

3,193

24,737

15,554

1,870

1,269

4,050

12,930

9,159

77,818

Select Portfolio
Servicing

2,647

413

2,915

4,059

404

242

982

1,856

1,453

14,971

Wells Fargo Bank NA5

16,787

4,166

54,385

42,908

2,404

18,378

14,601

23,319

14,251

191,199

TOTAL
(These 10 Largest
Servicers)

243,837
15.0%

46,973
2.9%

393,450
24.2%

410,853
25.3%

27,177
1.7%

100,726
6.2%

91,716
5.6%

214,858
13.2%

97,457
6.0%

1,627,047
100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through June 30, 2011. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record.
1 Homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, but no further action has yet been taken.
2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification.
3 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
4 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
5 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios.

The most common causes of
trials not accepted from all
servicers are:
• Insufficient documentation
• Ineligible borrower:
first lien housing expense is
already below 31% of
household income
• Ineligible mortgage

13

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Homeowner Experience (10 Largest Servicers)
Average Speed to Answer Homeowner Calls (June)

Servicer Complaint Rate to Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline
(Program to Date, Through July)

90.0
80.0

Average Speed to Answer
Calls to Homeowner’s
HOPETM Hotline for June:
3.1 Seconds

60.0
50.0

11%

40.0
30.0
20.0

9%
8%
7%
6%
5%

10.0

4%

-

3%

Calls to
Servicer:

Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JP Morgan
Chase

Litton

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

Source: Survey data through June 30, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines; Homeowner’s
HOPETM Hotline.

Call Abandon Rate (June)

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JP Morgan
Chase

Litton

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

27,371

6,405

3,139

15,902

1,621

2,244

249

628

10,214

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline.
Note: Complaint rate is the share of a specific servicer’s call volume that are complaints (e.g., for all calls about OneWest, 10.2%
included complaints.)

Target: 30 Calendar Days

60

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline
Average Call Abandon Rate
for June: 0.9%

50
Calendar Days

5%

Am. Home
Servicing

Complaints
(PTD):
2,231

Servicer Time to Resolve Third-Party Escalations
(Program to Date, Through July)

7%
6%

Program to Date Average: 6.7%

10%
% of Calls for Specific
Servicer

70.0

Seconds

Program to date, there have been 1,182,753 calls to the Homeowner’s
HOPETM Hotline regarding a specific SPA servicer, of which 6.7% included
complaints. Below shows specific complaint rates.

4%
3%
2%

40
30
20
10

1%

0

0%
Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JP Morgan
Chase

Litton

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

Source: Survey data through June 30, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines; Homeowner’s
HOPETM Hotline.

Am. Home
Servicing

Resolved: 526
Cases (PTD)

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JP Morgan
Chase

Litton

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

7,042

1,281

882

3,900

612

662

945

212

3,216

Source: HAMP Solutions Center. Target of 30 calendar days, effective Feb. 1, 2011, includes an
estimated 5 days of processing by HAMP Solutions Center.

14

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Modifications by Investor Type (Large Servicers)

GSE

Private

Portfolio

Total Active
Modifications

American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc.

1,288

24,292

1

25,581

Bank of America, NA1

96,093

58,803

9,682

164,578

CitiMortgage, Inc.

30,885

4,657

16,672

52,214

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

24,488

5,787

11,486

41,761

JP Morgan Chase NA2

52,586

40,520

19,568

112,674

86

12,025

10

12,121

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

7,162

23,574

114

30,850

OneWest Bank

14,260

13,838

2,388

30,486

523

16,682

2,568

19,773

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 3

49,421

15,020

40,963

105,404

Other HAMP Servicers

136,331

34,027

15,725

186,083

Total

413,123

249,225

119,177

781,525

Servicer

Litton Loan Servicing LP

Select Portfolio Servicing

1 Bank

of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and
Wilshire Credit Corporation.
Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
3 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
2 J.P.

Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

15

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

Background
Since the Making Home Affordable Program’s (MHA) inception in the spring
of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage
servicers. Treasury has been publicly reporting information about servicer
performance through two types of data: compliance data, which reflects
servicer compliance with specific MHA guidelines; and program results data,
which reflects how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible
homeowners and report program activity.
When MHA began, most servicers did not have the staff, procedures, or
systems in place to respond to the volume of homeowners struggling to pay
their mortgages, or to respond to the housing crisis generally. Very few
mortgage modifications were even occurring. Treasury sought to get
servicers to join MHA and to improve their operations quickly, so as to
implement a national mortgage modification program.
Through ongoing compliance reviews, Treasury has required participating
servicers to take specific actions to improve their servicing processes. While
the servicers have improved their performance, they still have more progress
to make. Toward that end, Treasury is publishing servicer assessments for
each of the 10 largest servicers participating in MHA. Not only will the
assessments provide more transparency to the public about servicer
performance in the program, but the assessments are also intended to
encourage servicers to correct identified instances of non-compliance.
Servicer participation in MHA is voluntary, based on a contract with Fannie
Mae as financial agent on behalf of Treasury. Although Treasury does not
regulate these institutions and does not have the authority to impose fines
or penalties, Treasury can, pursuant to the contract, take certain remedial
actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such
remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of
non-compliance, as noted above. In addition, Treasury can implement
financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to
servicers. Such incentive payments, which are the only payments Treasury
makes for the benefit of servicers under the program, include payments for

every successful permanent modification under the Home Affordable
Modification Program, and payments for completed short sale/deed-in-lieu
transactions pursuant to the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative
Program.
It is important to note that Treasury’s compliance work related to MHA
applies only to those servicers that have agreed to participate in MHA for
mortgage loans that are not owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie
Mac (Government Sponsored Enterprises, or GSEs). Treasury cannot and
does not perform compliance reviews of (1) mortgage loans or activities that
fall outside of MHA, (2) GSE loans or (3) those loans insured through the
Federal Housing Administration. For each servicer, the loans that are eligible
for MHA represent only a portion of that servicer’s overall mortgage
servicing operation.
Treasury’s foremost goal is to assist struggling homeowners who may be
eligible for MHA. These servicer assessments set a new benchmark for
providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing
against key metrics. But, in addition to this direct effect, MHA has had an
important indirect effect on the market as well. MHA has established
standards that have improved mortgage modifications across the industry,
and has led to important changes in the way mortgage servicers assist
struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how
mortgage modifications should be designed so that they are sustainable,
standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as
efficient and as understandable as possible, and a variety of standards for
protecting homeowners, such as prohibitions on “dual tracking” –
simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification while proceeding
to foreclose. Going forward, Treasury hopes these assessments will also set
the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist
homeowners.
Below are general descriptions of the data, the evaluation process, and the
consequences for servicers needing improvement.
(Continued on next page)

16

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

The Performance Data: Compliance and Program Results
Freddie Mac, acting as Treasury’s compliance agent for MHA, has created a
separate division known as Making Home Affordable–Compliance (MHA-C) to
evaluate servicer performance through reviews of program compliance. MHAC tests and evaluates a range of servicer activities for compliance with MHA
guidelines. Once MHA-C’s reviews are complete, MHA-C shares its results with
the servicers and identifies areas that need remediation. Each compliance
activity tested falls into one of three overall compliance categories – Identifying
and Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and
Program Management, Reporting and Governance. The compliance results
shared with the servicers are then used to generate the servicer assessments.
The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested by MHA-C
that had significant impact on homeowners and include for those highlighted
activities a one-star, two-star, or three-star rating for the most recent
evaluations. One star means the servicer did not meet Treasury’s benchmark
required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs substantial
improvement in its performance of that activity. Two stars mean the servicer
did not meet Treasury’s benchmark required for that particular activity, and the
servicer needs moderate improvement in its performance of that activity.
Three stars mean the servicer met Treasury’s benchmark required for that
particular activity, but the servicer may nonetheless need minor improvement
in its performance of that activity.
Although the compliance reviews emphasize objective measurements and
observed facts, compliance reviews still involve a certain level of judgment.
Compliance reviews are also retrospective in nature – looking backward, not
forward, which means that activities identified as needing improvement in a
given quarter may already be under remediation by the servicer. In addition,
not every compliance activity is evaluated every quarter, which means that a
rating from one quarter might carry forward to the subsequent quarter’s
assessment if that activity was not retested in that subsequent quarter. Finally,
the compliance reviews use “sampling” as a testing methodology. Sampling, an
industry-accepted auditing technique, looks at a subset of a particular
population of activity transactions, rather than the entirety of the population of
activity transactions, to extrapolate a servicer’s overall performance in that
particular activity.
In addition to the ratings for compliance data, the assessments also include

program results metrics. Fannie Mae, acting as Treasury’s program
administrator for MHA, collects servicer data used to measure program results.
These metrics are key indicators of how timely and effectively servicers assist
eligible homeowners under MHA guidelines and report program data.
Although the servicers are not given an overall rating for this data, the results
metrics nonetheless compare a servicer’s performance for a given quarter
against the “best” and “worst” performing servicer of the 10 largest servicers
participating in the program. The results metrics provide a snapshot of how
each of those servicers compares in specific areas under MHA.

The Determination Process: Results of the Data
Treasury reviews the compliance data and ratings, the program results metrics,
and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not
limited to, a servicer’s progress in implementing previously identified
improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial
improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its
performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the
significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments,
Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 16 summarizes the
overall level of improvement needed for each servicer.

Consequences for Servicers
For servicers in need of substantial improvement, Treasury will, absent
extenuating circumstances, withhold financial incentives owed to those
servicers until they make certain identified improvements. In certain cases,
particularly where there is a failure to correct identified problems within a
reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently reduce the financial
incentives. Servicers in need of moderate improvement will be subject to
withholding in the future if they fail to make certain identified improvements.
All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their
participation in MHA; these withholdings do not apply to incentives paid to
servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors.

Additional Information
See the “Metrics Description” on page 39 for a description of each of the
compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more
information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov.

17

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

2nd Quarter 2011 Servicer Assessment Results
The following table details the results of the Servicer Assessments, based on compliance and program results:

Improvement Needed

Servicer Name

Substantial

Bank of America, NA
J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA

Moderate

American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
CitiMortgage, Inc.
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Select Portfolio Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Minor

GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Litton Loan Servicing, LP
OneWest Bank

After evaluating the Second Quarter 2011 MHA Servicer Assessments, Treasury will continue to withhold servicer incentives owed to
two servicers requiring substantial improvement until those servicers make certain identified improvements.
For those servicers requiring moderate improvement, Treasury is not withholding servicer incentives for this quarter. However, those
servicers that fail to improve those areas identified may be subject to servicer incentive withholding in the future.
Three servicers have been identified as needing minor improvement for this quarter.
Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the Second Quarter 2011 servicer assessment results.

18

MHA Servicer Assessment: American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc.
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



0.7%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

5.3%





-



< 5%

5.7%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. servicer
incentives will not be withheld at this time.

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

19

MHA Servicer Assessment: American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc.
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance
American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

19%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

31%
27%

10%

20%

30%

40%

49%

50%

19
18

60%

24

20

40

60

80

40%

Dec. 2010
March 2011
June 2011

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.6%
0.4%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58

20%

78%
85%

Results as of:

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

0%

Best
Servicer
Performance

38
41
39

American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

59%

American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

29%
34%
0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

20

MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, NA
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



0.8%



< 10%

8.2%





-



< 5%

13.2%





-



< 5%

7.2%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



Bank of America, NA has areas requiring substantial improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, NA servicer incentives will continue to
be withheld at this time.

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

21

MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, NA
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

28%

Bank of
America, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

49%

29%
34%
10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

19
18

60%

24

46

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20

0%

40

60

80

March 2011
June 2011

54%
62%
54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58

40%

Dec. 2010

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Bank of
America, NA

58
58

20%

Results as of:

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)
Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, NA

0

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
Best
Servicer
Performance

26%

Bank of
America, NA

22%
26%

0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

22

MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



0.5%



< 10%

5.5%





-

1

< 5%

12.0%





-



< 5%

3.1%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

1 - Rating carried forward from prior quarter.

Rating Legend




Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will not be withheld
at this time.

Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

23

MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

49%

29%
34%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

19
18

60%

24

40
42
46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

20

0%

40

60

March 2011
June 2011

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

3.2%
1.0%
0.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80

40%

Dec. 2010

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

58
58

20%

Results as of:

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

35

CitiMortgage, Inc.

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

70%
73%
75%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

49%

29%
34%
0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

24

MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

1.7%



< 10%

0.7%





-



< 5%

4.2%





-



< 5%

2.9%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result


GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

25

MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials
Best
Servicer
Performance

2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

2%
2%
1%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

49%

29%
34%
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

19
18

60%

24

46

20

0%

40

60

80

40%

Dec. 2010
March 2011
June 2011

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
1.4%
0.1%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58

20%

Results as of:

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

26%

Best
Servicer
Performance

24
29
29

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

78%
79%
80%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

78%
84%
88%

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

26

MHA Servicer Assessment: J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



1.2%



< 10%

3.2%





-



< 5%

20.6%





-



< 5%

12.4%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA has areas requiring substantial improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA servicer incentives will
continue to be withheld at this time.

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

27

MHA Servicer Assessment: J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

J.P. Morgan
Chase Bank, NA

16%

9%

49%

29%
34%
10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

19
18

60%

24

45

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20

0%

40

60

80

June 2011

57%
66%
54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

0.3%
0.7%
0.5%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58

40%

March 2011

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

J.P. Morgan
Chase Bank, NA

55
57

20%

Dec. 2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

J.P. Morgan
Chase Bank, NA

0

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

40%

J.P. Morgan
Chase Bank, NA

17%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

28

MHA Servicer Assessment: Litton Loan Servicing, LP
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

3.3%



< 10%

2.7%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

0.3%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result


Litton Loan Servicing, LP has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

29

MHA Servicer Assessment: Litton Loan Servicing, LP
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

12%
11%
10%

Litton Loan
Servicing, LP

49%

29%
34%
10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

19
18

24

29
32
32

Litton Loan
Servicing, LP

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

20

40

0%

80

20%

40%

March 2011

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Litton Loan
Servicing, LP

0.0%
0.2%
0.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58
60

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Dec. 2010
June 2011

68%
74%
72%

Litton Loan
Servicing, LP

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

30

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



2.7%



< 10%

3.0%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

3.1%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC servicer incentives will not be
withheld at this time.

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

31

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

20%
18%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

30%

49%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

19
18

24

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

60

80

40%

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.4%
0.5%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58

20%

March 2011

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

55
54

20

0%

Best
Servicer
Performance

N/A

0

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Dec. 2010
June 2011

77%
76%
79%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

29%
34%
0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

32

MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

0.7%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

1.8%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result


OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

33

MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

OneWest Bank

6%

14%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

23%

10%

20%

49%

30%

40%

50%

19
18

60%

24

38
42
43

OneWest Bank

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

20

40

0%

80

20%

40%

67%

Dec. 2010
March 2011
June 2011

79%

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

OneWest Bank

0.0%
0.3%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58
60

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

46%

OneWest Bank

29%
34%
0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

34

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



0.0%



< 10%

0.3%





-



< 5%

10.0%





-



< 5%

1.3%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, Select Portfolio Servicing servicer incentives will not be
withheld at this time.

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

35

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Select Portfolio
Servicing

5%

10%
10%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

49%

29%
34%
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

19
18
N/A

19
18
46

0

20

40

Select Portfolio
Servicing

77%
84%
88%

June 2011

26%

0%

80

20%

40%

March 2011

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

0.1%
0.0%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58
60

Dec. 2010

60%

24

Worst
Servicer
Performance

78%
84%
88%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

36

MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, NA
Compliance Results

Overview


These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements.



Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome.



Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result.

Second Quarter 2011
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


Second Look % Disagree
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
servicer's MHA determination

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates
appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.


Second Look % Unable to Determine
Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on
the servicer's MHA determination





Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a
timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA
activities.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance
Assesses whether the servicer has effective program
management, governance processes, and timely and correct
submission of program reports and program information.



Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and
Governance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Rating Legend



0.4%



< 10%

1.3%





-



< 5%

4.4%





-



< 5%

8.0%





-



Incentive Payment Data Errors
Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data
discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record



< 4%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Rating

Income Calculation Error %
Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from
the servicer's by more than 5%



Servicer Result

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted
effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Benchmark

Result

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed



Wells Fargo Bank, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed



After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, NA servicer incentives will not be withheld at this
time, and previously withheld incentives will be released as areas requiring substantial improvement have
been remediated.

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

37

MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, NA
Program Results

Conversion Rate for Trials Started
On or After 6/1/2010

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2%
2%
1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

14%
11%
11%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

10%

20%

49%

30%

40%

50%

19
18

60%

24

20

40

60

80

40%

March 2011
June 2011

54%
62%
60%

80%

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
1.3%
0.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

58
58

20%

75%
84%

Dec. 2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

46

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

0%

Best
Servicer
Performance

31
35
35

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

26%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

65%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

29%
34%
0%

78%
84%
88%

Best
Servicer
Performance

19.1%

3.9%
3.4%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.

38

MHA Servicer Assessment
Appendix

Metrics Descriptions
Compliance Metrics (quantitative)

accuracy, enhancing policies and procedures, and
conducting staff training on income calculation.

Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury pays
incentives to servicers, investors, and homeowners
for permanent modifications completed under MHA.
Although intended for different recipients, all
incentives are paid through the servicer. Data that
servicers upload to the program system of record is
used to calculate the incentives paid to servicers,
investors, and homeowners. This metric measures
how data anomalies between servicer loan files and
the reported information affect incentive payments.
Second Look % Unable to Determine: This metric
For Incentive Payment Data Error results, remedial
measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second
actions Treasury requires servicers to take include,
Look for which MHA-C is not able to determine, based
but are not limited to: correcting the identified errors
on the documentation provided, how the servicer
and correcting system and operational processes such
reached its loan-modification decision.
that accurate data is mapped to its appropriate places
For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to
in the program system of record.
Determine results, remedial actions Treasury requires
Compliance Metrics (qualitative)
servicers to take include, but are not limited to:
reevaluating loans not offered HAMP modifications, Servicers establish processes and internal controls to
submitting additional documentation to support the help ensure their compliance with Program guidance.
initial reason for denial of the modification, clarifying For each of the performance categories, Treasury
loan status, and engaging in systemic process
performs a qualitative assessment of those internal
remediation. For such results, servicers are also
controls based on MHA-C’s compliance reviews. That
reminded of their obligation to suspend foreclosure of assessment evaluates the nature, scope, and
the loan until the unresolved items are remediated.
potential or actual impact on homeowners resulting
from instances of servicer non-compliance with its
Income Calculation Errors: Correctly calculating
homeowner monthly income is a critical component own internal controls. For ineffective internal
controls, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers
of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as
establishing an accurate modification payment. This to take include, but are not limited to: identifying and
metric measures how often MHA-C disagrees with a reevaluating any affected loans, enhancing the
servicer’s calculation of a borrower’s Monthly Gross effectiveness of internal controls, and conducting
staff training on servicer procedures.
Income, allowing for up to a 5% differential from
Second Look % Disagree: Second Look is a process in
which MHA-C reviews loans not in a permanent
modification, to assess the accuracy of the servicer’s
determination of whether the homeowner is eligible
for a modification. This metric measures the
percentage of loans reviewed in Second Look with
which MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s
determination.

MHA-C’s calculations. For Income Calculation Error
Program Metrics
results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers
Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the
to take include, but are not limited to: correcting
rate
of conversion to permanent modification for
income errors exceeding the 5% differential, requiring
trials
started on or after June 1, 2010, when all
the servicer to review their own income calculation

servicers were required to verify income
documentation at trial start. Conversion rate is
measured against all trials eligible to convert – those
three months in trial, or four months if the borrower
was at risk of imminent default at trial modification
start. Permanent modifications transferred among
servicers are credited to the originating servicer; trial
modifications transferred are reflected in the current
servicer’s population.
Aged Trials as % of Active Trials: This monthly metric
measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share
of all active trials. These figures include trial
modifications that have been converted to
permanent modifications by the servicer and are
pending reporting to the program system of record,
plus some portion which may be canceled.
Days to Resolve Escalated Cases: This program-todate metric measures servicer response time for
homeowner inquiries escalated to the HAMP Solution
Center. Effective Feb. 1, 2011, a target of 30 calendar
days was established for non-GSE escalation cases,
including an estimated 5 days processing by HAMP
Solution Center. These figures include both GSE and
non-GSE escalation results. The methodology for
calculating average days to respond to escalated
cases was updated in June 2011.
% of Missing Modification Status Reports: This
monthly metric measures the servicer’s ability to
promptly report on modification status. Inconsistent
and untimely reporting of modification status reports
may impact incentive compensation and loan
performance analysis.
For more information on the assessments, please
visit: www.FinancialStability.gov.

39

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Appendix A1: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP
Servicers participating in the HAMP First Lien Modification Program may also offer additional support for homeowners, including Home Affordable Foreclosure
Alternatives (HAFA), a forbearance for unemployed borrowers through the Unemployment Program (UP), and Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA).
Effective October 3, 2010, the ability to make new financial commitments under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) terminated, and consequently no
new Servicer Participation Agreements may be executed. In addition, effective June 25, 2010, no new housing programs may be created under TARP.
Allstate Mortgage Loans &
Investments, Inc.
American Eagle Federal Credit Union
American Home Mortgage Servicing,
Inc
AMS Servicing, LLC
Aurora Loan Services, LLC
Bank of America, N.A.1
Bank United
Bay Federal Credit Union
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
Bramble Savings Bank
Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC
CCO Mortgage
Central Florida Educators Federal
Credit Union
CitiMortgage, Inc.
Citizens 1st National Bank
Community Bank & Trust Company
Community Credit Union of Florida
CUC Mortgage Corporation
DuPage Credit Union
Fay Servicing, LLC
Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank
First Bank
First Financial Bank, N.A.

Franklin Credit Management
Corporation
Franklin Savings
Fresno County Federal Credit Union
Glass City Federal Credit Union
GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Grafton Suburban Credit Union
Great Lakes Credit Union
Greater Nevada Mortgage Services
Green Tree Servicing LLC
Hartford Savings Bank
Hillsdale County National Bank
HomEq Servicing
HomeStar Bank & Financial Services
Horicon Bank
Horizon Bank, NA
IBM Southeast Employees' Federal
Credit Union
IC Federal Credit Union
Idaho Housing and Finance
Association
iServe Residential Lending LLC
iServe Servicing Inc.
J.P.Morgan Chase Bank, NA2
Lake City Bank
Lake National Bank

Liberty Bank and Trust Co.
Litton Loan Servicing
Los Alamos National Bank
Magna Bank
Marix Servicing, LLC
Midland Mortgage Company
Midwest Community Bank
Mission Federal Credit Union
Mortgage Center, LLC
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
Navy Federal Credit Union
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
OneWest Bank
ORNL Federal Credit Union
Park View Federal Savings Bank
Pathfinder Bank
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage3
Purdue Employees Federal Credit
Union
QLending, Inc.
Quantum Servicing Corporation
Residential Credit Solutions
RG Mortgage Corporation

RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing
Corporation
Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.
Schools Financial Credit Union
SEFCU
Select Portfolio Servicing
Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial
Services, Inc.
ShoreBank
Silver State Schools Credit Union
Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC
Sterling Savings Bank
Suburban Mortgage Company of New
Mexico
Technology Credit Union
The Golden 1 Credit Union
U.S. Bank National Association
United Bank
United Bank Mortgage Corporation
Vantium Capital, Inc.
Vist Financial Corp.
Wealthbridge Mortgage Corp.
Wells Fargo Bank, NA4
Yadkin Valley Bank

1 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing
LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
2 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
3 Formerly National City Bank.
4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia
Mortgage, FSB.

40

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs
Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)
Bank of America, NA1
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
CitiMortgage, Inc.
Community Credit Union of Florida
GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Green Tree Servicing LLC
iServe Residential Lending, LLC
iServe Servicing, Inc.
J.P.Morgan Chase Bank, NA2
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
OneWest Bank
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage 3
Residential Credit Solutions
Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc.
Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP)
Amarillo National Bank
American Financial Resources Inc.
Aurora Financial Group, Inc.
Aurora Loan Services, LLC
Banco Popular de Puerto Rico
Bank of America, NA1
Capital International Financial, Inc.
CitiMortgage, Inc.
CU Mortgage Services, Inc.
First Federal Bank of Florida
First Mortgage Corporation

Franklin Savings
Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC
GMAC Mortgage, LLC.
Green Tree Servicing LLC
Guaranty Bank
iServe Residential Lending, LLC
iServe Servicing, Inc.
James B. Nutter & Company
J.P.Morgan Chase Bank,NA2
M&T Bank
Marix Servicing, LLC
Marsh Associates, Inc.
Midland Mortgage Company
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Mortgage 3
RBC Bank (USA)
Residential Credit Solutions
Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.
Schmidt Mortgage Company
Select Portfolio Servicing
Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc.
Stockman Bank of Montana
Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4
Weststar Mortgage, Inc.

FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP)
Bank of America, NA1
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
CitiMortgage, Inc.
Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation
GMAC Mortgage, LLC.
Green Tree Servicing LLC
J.P.Morgan Chase Bank, NA2
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage 3
Residential Credit Solutions
Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.
Select Portfolio Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

Rural Housing Service Modification Program
(RD-HAMP)
Banco Popular de Puerto Rico
Bank of America, N.A. 1
Horicon Bank
J.P.Morgan Chase Bank, NA 2
Magna Bank
Marix Servicing, LLC
Midland Mortgage Company
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

1 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home
Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
2 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.
3 Formerly National City Bank.
4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage FSB.

41