Full text of HAMP Performance Summary : Making Home Affordable Program : Program Performance Report, Through January 2012

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 January 2012

Report Highlights

Over 950,000 Homeowners Granted Permanent Modifications
• Program to date, homeowners in permanent modifications have saved
an estimated $11 billion in monthly mortgage payments. Homeowners
in active first lien permanent modifications are currently saving a
median of $533 per month – more than one-third of the median
before-modification payment.
• 85% of eligible homeowners entering a HAMP trial modification since
June 1, 2010 have received a permanent modification, with an average
trial period of 3.5 months.
• For homeowners currently in HAMP permanent modifications with the
Principal Reduction Alternative feature, the median amount of
principal reduced is $68,063. This amounts to over $3.7 billion in
principal reductions. These homeowners are further underwater and
more seriously delinquent at trial start than the overall population of
HAMP participants. 88% of homeowners in the PRA program are at
least 60 days delinquent at trial start (compared to 80% of the overall
HAMP portfolio) with a before-modification loan-to-value ratio of
159% (compared to 120% for the overall portfolio).

This Month: Q4 2011 Servicer Assessment Results

• For the fourth quarter of 2011, no servicers were determined to need
substantial improvement in their performance under MHA guidelines.
• Two servicers were found to need minor improvement on the areas
reviewed for the fourth quarter, while seven servicers were found to
need moderate improvement. Servicers will need to continue to
demonstrate progress in areas identified in follow-up program
reviews.

SUMMARY RESULTS:
Inside:
First Lien Modification Activity
First Lien Modification Characteristics/
Modifications by Investor Type
Principal Reduction Alternative
Activity for 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP, HAFA and
UP
HAMP Activity by State
HAMP Activity by MSA/
Homeowner Outreach
Aged Trials

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

SERVICER RESULTS:
First Lien Modification Activity by
Servicer
First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA
Activity by Servicer
Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners
Average Delinquency at Trial Start
Trial Length
Conversion Rate
Homeowner Experience
Disposition of Homeowners Not in
HAMP

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16-17

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Overview
Servicer Results
Description of Metrics

18-20
21-38
39

APPENDICES:
Participants in MHA Programs

40-41

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

HAMP Activity: First Lien Modifications

HAMP Trials Started

(As of Dec. 31, 2011)

Trial
Modifications

Permanent
Modifications

884,910

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3

1,971,644

All Trials Started

1,791,354

1,700
1,640

1,650

16,759

Trial Modifications Canceled (Cumulative)5

763,692

1,450

Active Trials

76,343

1,400

All Permanent Modifications Started

951,319

1,350

Permanent Modifications Reported Since
December 2011 Report

17,992

Permanent Modifications Canceled
(Cumulative)6

182,546

Active Permanent Modifications

768,773

1,500

1,688

1,730

1,747

50

1,545
1,511

Jan
2011

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

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

Nov

Dec

Jan
2012

0

Source: HAMP system of record. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of
record at any time. For example, 16,759 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior
report; 12,335 were trials with a first payment recorded in January 2012.

Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)
1,000

eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of December 31, 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 monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through January 31, 2012. The reduction is due to
Wells Fargo Bank, NA restating the number of trial offers extended from the previous month.
4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime.
5 716,737 had trial start dates prior to June 1, 2010 when Treasury implemented a verified income requirement.
6 A permanent modification is canceled when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Includes
3,124 loans paid off.

1,779 1,791

1,580

1,550

Trials Reported Since December 2011 Report4

1,665

1,709

1,763

1,613

1,600

All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

1 Estimated

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2

1,750

2,520,402
All Trials Started (000s)

HAMP Eligibility

Eligible Delinquent Loans1

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

1,800

Total

100

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

New Trials Started (000s)

1,850

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

900

857

800

763

700
600

608

634

670

699

791

883

910

933

951

817

731

500
400

Jan 2011

Feb

Mar

Source: HAMP system of record.

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan 2012

2

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics
• Aggregate savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien
permanent modifications are estimated to total approximately
$11.0 billion, program to date, compared with unmodified
mortgage obligations.

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent
modifications are:
• 66.4% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or
unemployment)
• 11.7% reported excessive obligation
• 3.3% reported an illness of the principal borrower

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active permanent
first lien modifications is $532.73, or 37% of the median monthly
payment before modification.
• Of trial modifications started, 80% 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.

• Active permanent modifications feature the following modification steps:
• 97.9% feature interest rate reductions
• 59.3% offer term extension
• 30.7% include principal forbearance

Modifications by Investor Type (Large Servicers)
GSE

Private

Portfolio

Total Active
Modifications

1,273

26,747

0

28,020

Bank of America, NA1

81,914

63,158

10,649

155,721

CitiMortgage, Inc.

31,977

5,632

17,073

54,682

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

25,086

5,919

11,783

42,788

JPMorgan Chase NA2

63,045

55,938

24,625

143,608

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 3

6,820

36,650

124

43,594

OneWest Bank

15,028

15,650

2,677

33,355

Servicer
American Home Mortgage
Servicing, Inc.

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.

1,407

10,008

1,941

13,356

520

15,947

2,518

18,985

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

52,411

15,635

47,258

115,304

Other HAMP Servicers

157,184

23,221

15,298

195,703

Total

436,665

274,505

133,946

845,116

Select Portfolio Servicing

Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications
Before
Modification

After
Modification

Median
Decrease

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio1

45.3%

31.0%

-14.4 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2

76.8%

59.3%

-14.7 pct pts

$1,431.54

$828.62

-$532.73

Loan Characteristic

Median Monthly Housing Payment3
1

Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo fees)
to monthly gross income.
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.
2

1 Bank

of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and
Wilshire Credit Corporation.
2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.
3 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

3

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA)
The Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) was implemented in October 2010. PRA requires servicers of non-GSE loans to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for
mortgages with a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio greater than 115% or when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP first lien modification. While servicers are required to
evaluate homeowners for PRA, they are not required to offer principal reduction and generally may only do so when permitted by the mortgage investor.
PRA pays investors incentives for every dollar of principal forgiven, according to a sliding scale and depending on the degree to which the homeowner's unmodified
balance is greater than the market value of the home. To encourage investors to consider or expand the use of principal reduction, Treasury issued program guidance
on February 16, 2012 tripling financial incentives under PRA for investors who agree to reduce principal for eligible underwater homeowners. The new program
guidance applies to all permanent modifications of non-GSE loans under HAMP that include PRA and have a trial period plan effective date on or after March 1, 2012.
PRA can be a feature of a HAMP trial or permanent modification.

PRA Activity

Modification Characteristics

While both GSE and non-GSE loans are eligible for HAMP, at the present time due to
GSE policy, servicers can only offer PRA on non-GSE modifications under HAMP.
Servicer volume can vary based on the investor composition of the servicer’s portfolio
and respective policy with regards to PRA. 46% of non-GSE trial starts that were
reported in January 2012 included principal reduction.
To date, the 10 largest MHA servicers account for 98% of all trial modifications started
with PRA, and the top three MHA servicers account for 68% of all PRA volume (and
over 50% of overall HAMP volume). (See page 10 for additional servicer detail.)
All PRA Trial Modifications Started

67,835

PRA Trial Modifications Active

16,213

All PRA Permanent Modifications Started

47,114

PRA Permanent Modifications Active

$68,063

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

31.3%

PRA Trials Started as a
% of Non-GSE Trials
Started by Month

50%

20%
10%
0%

14%
6%

20%

23%

28%

32% 32% 32% 32%

All 1MP3

1MP with PRA

- At least 60 days delinquent

80%

88%

- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default

20%

12%

- California

25%

31%

- Florida

12%

17%

- Illinois

5%

6%

Top three States’ Percent of Total

42%

54%

Loan Characteristics
Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:

Top three States by Activity4, Percent of Total Activity:

Active Permanent Modifications – Median Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio:

Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Active Permanent
Modifications under PRA

30%

Overall, homeowners receiving permanent loan modifications with the PRA feature
also have a higher before-modification LTV ratio than those without the PRA feature.

44,058

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent
Modifications1

40%

While the population of loan modifications with the PRA feature is still relatively small,
the program data indicate that there are more homeowners seriously delinquent at the
time of trial start than the overall population of HAMP homeowners.

36%

- Before Modification

120%

159%

- After Modification5

122%

115%

$3,708,011,613
Active Permanent Modifications – Median before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio:

46%
43% 45%
41% 42% 40%

- Front-End DTI

45.3%

45.3%

- Back-End DTI

76.8%

67.9%

Under the PRA program, principal is vested over a 3 year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount that may be forgiven.
2 PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization.
3 Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without the PRA feature.
4 Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.
5 Because the first step of the standard HAMP waterfall includes the capitalization of accrued interest, out-of-pocket escrow advances to
third parties, any escrow advances made to third parties during the trial period plan, and servicing advances that are made for costs and
expenses incurred in performing servicing obligations, this can result in an increase in the principal balance after modification. As a result,
the loan-to-value ratio can increase in the modification process.
1

4

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

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 HAMP servicer. This assistance can result in a modification of the
second lien and even full or partial extinguishment of the second lien. 2MP
modifications and partial extinguishments require that the first lien HAMP
modification be permanent and active and that the second lien have an unpaid
balance of $5,000 or more and a monthly payment of at least $100.

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 20% of HAFA agreements started, the
homeowner began a HAMP trial modification but later requested a HAFA agreement
or was disqualified from HAMP.
All HAFA Agreements Started1

49,443

HAFA Agreements Active

9,822

HAFA Transactions Completed

31,426

All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1

65,708

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien
Extinguishments

14,142

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2

1,762

Completed Transactions – Short Sale

Active Second Lien Modifications3

49,804

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:

30,583
843

1 Servicer

Second Lien Partially Extinguished

2,160

Second Lien Loan Modifications4

47,644

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.

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

Second Lien Extinguishment Details
Median Amount of Full Extinguishment

$61,850

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active
Second Lien Modifications

$6,694

1 Includes

second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for
January 2012 data, though the effective date may occur in February 2012. Number of modifications is
net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
2 Includes 96 loans paid off.
3 Includes 2,144 loans in active non-payment status whereby the 1MP has disqualified from HAMP. As
a result, the servicer is no longer required to report payment activity on the 2MP modification.
4Second lien modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate
reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity

The Treasury MHA Unemployment Program (UP) provides a temporary forbearance to
homeowners who are unemployed. Under Treasury guidelines, unemployed homeowners
must be considered for a minimum of 12 months’ forbearance.

All UP Forbearance Plans Started (through Dec. 2011)

18,403

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required

15,768

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required

2,635

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through Dec. 31, 2011.

The Treasury FHA-HAMP Program provides assistance to eligible homeowners with FHAinsured mortgages.

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started

8,441

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started

5,159

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

5

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

HAMP Activity by State

State

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

Modification Activity by State

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

AK

43

332

375

0.0%

MT

86

881

967

0.1%

AL

490

4,224

4,714

0.6%

NC

1,368

13,617

14,985

1.8%

AR

172

1,664

1,836

0.2%

ND

8

128

136

0.0%

AZ

2,334

32,858

35,192

4.2%

NE

103

1,006

1,109

0.1%

CA

18,138

193,910

212,048

25.1%

NH

337

3,479

3,816

0.5%

CO

975

10,642

11,617

1.4%

NJ

2,649

24,586

27,235

3.2%

CT

1,040

9,475

10,515

1.2%

NM

263

2,499

2,762

0.3%

DC

128

1,317

1,445

0.2%

NV

1,473

18,864

20,337

2.4%

DE

223

2,310

2,533

0.3%

NY

4,789

36,294

41,083

4.9%

FL

9,796

92,432

102,228

12.1%

OH

1,767

16,394

18,161

2.1%

GA

2,869

27,623

30,492

3.6%

OK

210

HI

285

2,914

3,199

0.4%

OR

812

IA

170

1,883

2,053

0.2%

PA

1,591

ID

244

2,982

3,226

0.4%

RI

314

IL

3,829

40,763

44,592

5.3%

SC

IN

724

7,195

7,919

0.9%

SD

KS

180

1,794

1,974

0.2%

TN

831

KY

266

2,829

3,095

0.4%

TX

2,512

LA

520

4,200

4,720

0.6%

UT

566

1,746

1,956

0.2%

8,405

9,217

1.1%

15,512

17,103

2.0%

3,880

4,194

0.5%

719

7,030

7,749

0.9%

31

273

304

0.0%

7,680

8,511

1.0%

19,924

22,436

2.7%

7,231

7,797

0.9%

MA

1,949

18,568

20,517

2.4%

VA

1,626

18,226

19,852

2.3%

MD

2,356

24,398

26,754

3.2%

VT

65

659

724

0.1%

ME

231

2,125

2,356

0.3%

WA

1,750

15,632

17,382

2.1%

MI

2,002

24,380

26,382

3.1%

WI

765

7,238

8,003

0.9%

MN

934

12,734

13,668

1.6%

WV

100

1,057

1,157

0.1%

MO

772

7,689

8,461

1.0%

WY

32

379

411

0.0%

MS

263

2,735

2,998

0.4%

Other2

643

2,177

2,820

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: 4th Quarter 2011
National Delinquency
Survey, Mortgage
Bankers Association.

60+ Day Delinquency Rate
5.0% and lower
5.01% - 10.0%

10.01% - 15.0%
15.01% - 20.0%

20.01%
and higher

6

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline 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
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano
Beach, FL
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI
MSA
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario,
CA
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria,
DC-VA-MD-WV

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

Active
Trials

Permanent
Modifications

6,009

59,161

65,170

7.7%

5,881

48,873

54,754

6.5%

4,533

39,041

43,574

5.2%

3,723

39,576

43,299

5.1%

40,067

43,274

5.1%

2,264

26,049

28,313

3.4%

1,716

26,585

28,301

3.3%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA

2,281

22,351

24,632

2.9%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA

1,731

16,300

18,031

2.1%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV

1,250

15,472

16,722

2.0%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI

1,225

14,784

16,009

1.9%

1,306

14,094

15,400

1.8%

1,340

14,051

15,391

1.8%

1,344

13,418

14,762

1.7%

1,154

13,202

14,356

1.7%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville,
CA

January

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

2,815,564

80,335

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

1,341,003

39,443

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records.

3,207

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA

Program to
Date

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

63
60,897

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1

8,212,279

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov
(January 2012)

3,328,363

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative)

137,406,910

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. The reduction is due to Wells Fargo
Bank, NA restating the number of solicitation numbers from the previous month.

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 January 2012

Aged Trials1

200,000

190,412

The number of active trials lasting 6 months or longer is approximately 21,200.
165,543

Program guidance directs servicers to cancel or convert trial modifications after 3 or 4
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

27,345
26,362 25,390 23,552
23,014 23,061

19,793 18,359 20,332 21,002 21,211

0

May
2010

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan
2011

Feb

March

April

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan
2012

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 or cancelled by the servicer, but not reported as such to the HAMP system of record.

8

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer
As of
Dec. 31, 2011

Cumulative

As of Jan. 31, 2012

Estimated
Eligible 60+ Day
Delinquent
Borrowers1

Trial Plan
Offers
Extended2

All HAMP
Trials
Started3

All HAMP
Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Active Trial
Modifications3

Active Trial
Modifications
Lasting 6 Months
or Longer4

Active
Permanent
Modifications3

American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc

35,016

43,309

39,432

31,777

2,751

189

25,269

Bank of America, NA5

165,223

531,361

380,925

174,624

16,936

12,443

138,785

CitiMortgage, Inc.

51,933

199,303

136,401

60,590

3,999

1,582

50,683

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

22,704

83,176

67,974

50,562

2,610

49

40,178

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA6

133,076

350,910

307,072

155,666

17,970

2,339

125,638

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC7

67,803

95,889

90,152

53,785

5,145

1,213

38,449

OneWest Bank

31,551

76,397

59,132

35,004

3,587

224

29,768

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.

13,100

44,670

40,169

17,259

537

60

12,819

Select Portfolio Servicing

9,294

69,770

42,948

24,039

506

13

18,479

Servicer

NA8

108,668

290,479

254,281

126,432

10,202

1,263

105,102

Other SPA servicers9

83,259

186,380

190,380

107,539

4,721

584

88,119

Other GSE Servicers10

163,283

NA

182,488

114,042

7,379

1,252

95,484

Total

884,910

1,971,644

1,791,354

951,319

76,343

21,211

768,773

Wells Fargo Bank,

1 Estimated

eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers as reported by servicers as
of Dec. 31, 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.
As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through
Jan. 31, 2012. The reduction is due to Wells Fargo Bank, NA restating the
number of trial offers extended from the previous month.
3 As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes FHAHAMP modifications. Subject to adjustment based on servicer
reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing
transfers. 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 or cancelled by the servicer, but not reported as
such to the HAMP system of record
5 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC
Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit
Corporation.
6 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under
EMC Mortgage Corporation.
2

7 Ocwen

Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under
Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
9 Other SPA servicers are entities excluding the 10 largest servicers that have
signed participation agreements with Treasury and Fannie Mae. A full list
of participating servicers is in Appendix A1.
10 Includes servicers of loans owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac. Includes GSE loans previously transferred from SPA
servicers.
8 Wells

9

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1

Trials
Started3

Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Trials
Started3

Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Second Lien
Modification
(2MP)
Second Lien
Modifications
Started4

American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

39,432

31,777

0

0

Bank of America, NA6

380,925

174,624

14,643

CitiMortgage, Inc.

136,401

60,590

2,184

Principal Reduction Alternative
(PRA)2

HAMP First Lien Modifications
Servicer

Home Affordable Foreclosure
Alternatives (HAFA)
Agreements
Started5

Agreements
Completed

N/A

581

272

11,982

23,036

7,677

6,506

1,610

8,767

149

110

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

67,974

50,562

1,195

665

3,822

1,882

1,252

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA7

307,072

155,666

15,957

9,369

15,261

19,956

11,776

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC8

90,152

53,785

12,649

8,130

N/A

1,770

925

OneWest Bank

59,132

35,004

3,578

2,248

1,771

1,592

713

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.

40,169

17,259

576

514

N/A

366

109

Select Portfolio Servicing

42,948

24,039

2

2

N/A

2,004

1,272

Wells Fargo Bank, NA9

254,281

126,432

15,733

11,494

10,817

10,944

6,580

Other Servicers

372,868

221,581

1,318

1,100

2,234

2,522

1,911

1,791,354

951,319

67,835

47,114

65,708

49,443

31,426

Total
1

MHA Program Effective Dates:
HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009
PRA: October 1, 2010
2MP: August 13, 2009
HAFA: April 5, 2010
2 While both GSE and non-GSE loans are eligible for HAMP, at the present time due to
GSE policy, servicers can only offer PRA on non-GSE modifications under HAMP.
Servicer volume can vary based on the investor composition of the servicer’s portfolio
and respective policy with regards to PRA. See page 3 for additional servicer detail on
HAMP activity by investor type.
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. Servicers may enter new trial
modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time.

4

See Appendix A1 and A2 for servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs.

N/A – Servicer does not participate in the program.

Number of second lien modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily
due to servicer data corrections.
5
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 thirdparty purchaser and cooperation of junior lienholders and mortgage insurers to
complete the transaction.
6
Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans
Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
7
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage
Corporation.
8 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
9
Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage,
FSB.

10

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, Jan. 2011 – Dec. 2011
Per program guidance, servicers are directed to establish Right Party Contact (RPC) with homeowners of delinquent HAMP eligible
loans1 and then evaluate the homeowners' eligibility for HAMP. There is a range of performance results across top program servicers
with respect to making RPC and completing the evaluations.
100%

97%

95%

92%
90%

93%
87%

85%

90%

87%

85%

80%

75%

70%
60%
50%

95%

40%

81%

76%

76%

61%

30%

79%

86%
68%

68%

SPS

Wells Fargo

59%

20%
10%
0%
Am. Home
Servicing
1 Homeowners

Bank of
America

Citi

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Right Party Contact Ratio2

Ocwen

OneWest

Saxon

HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before Jan. 1, 2009 and were owner-occupied at origination; excludes FHA and VA loans, loans where investor
pooling and servicing agreements preclude modification, and manufactured housing loans with title/chattel issues that exclude them from HAMP.
2 Right Party Contact (RPC) is achieved when a servicer has successfully communicated directly with the homeowner obligated under the mortgage about resolution of their delinquency in accordance with program
guidelines. The RPC ratio reflects the share of homeowners with which the servicer has established RPC as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer needed.
3 HAMP evaluations complete ratio reflects the share of homeowners who have been evaluated for HAMP as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer
needed. Evaluated homeowners include those offered a trial plan, those that are denied or did not accept a trial plan and homeowners that failed to submit a complete HAMP evaluation package by program-specified
timelines.
Source: Survey of 10 largest participating servicers as of December 31, 2011.

11

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Average Homeowner Delinquency at Trial Start1
Servicers are instructed to follow a series of steps in order to evaluate homeowners for HAMP, including:
• Identifying and soliciting the homeowners in the early stages of delinquency;
• Making reasonable efforts to establish contact with the homeowners;
• Gathering required documentation once contact is established in order to evaluate the homeowners for a HAMP trial; and,
• Communicating decisions to the homeowners.
Effective 10/1/11, a new servicer compensation structure exists to encourage servicers to work with struggling homeowners in the early stages of delinquency with the
highest incentives paid for permanent modifications completed when the homeowner is 120 days delinquent or less at the trial start.

250

Maximum servicer incentive is paid for
converting a permanent modification
that was 120 days delinquent or less at
trial start.

200

150

100

50

0
Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of
America

Citi

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

Saxon

SPS

Wells Fargo

Other
Servicers

1

For all permanent modifications started, the average number of days delinquent as of the trial plan start date. Delinquency is calculated as the number of days between the
homeowner's last paid installment before the trial plan and the first payment due date of the trial plan.

12

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

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

4.5

4

3

3.5

3.4

3.5

3.3

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.2

3.5

3.3

3.3

2

1

0

Am. Home Servicing

Bank of America

CitiMortgage

Trials Started Before 6/1/10

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

Trials Started On/After 6/1/10

OneWest

Saxon

SPS

Before 6/1/10 Average (5.3)

Wells Fargo

Other SPA Servicers Other GSE 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.

13

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Conversion Rate1

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

Of Trials Started Before 6/1/10:
43% Converted to Permanent Modification
0.7% Pending Processing or Decision
100%
88%

Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10:
85% Converted to Permanent Modification
5.7% Pending Processing or Decision
84%
82%

80%

Conversion Rate

84%

90%
83%

84%

80%

89%

87%

86%

82%

60%

40%

20%

0%
Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

Average of Trials Started Before 6/1/10 (43%)

OneWest

Saxon

SPS

Wells Fargo

Other SPA
Servicers

Other GSE
Servicers

Average of Trials Started On/After 6/1/10 (85%)

1 Per

program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010 all trials must be started using verified income. Before 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.

14

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Homeowner Experience (10 Largest Servicers)
Average Speed to Answer Homeowner Calls (December 2011)
60

Program to date, there have been 1,389,426 calls to the Homeowner’s
HOPETM Hotline regarding a specific SPA servicer, of which 6.6% included
complaints. Below shows specific complaint rates.

Average Speed to Answer Calls to
Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline for
December: 16.9 Seconds

50

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

11%

40
% of Calls for Specific
Servicer

Seconds

30
20

9%
8%
7%
6%
5%

10
0

Program to Date Average: 6.6%

10%

4%
3%
Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

Saxon

SPS

Wells Fargo

Am. Home

Complaints Servicing
(PTD):
2,727

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

Saxon

31,881

7,116

3,560

18,068

4,577

295

1,225

SPS

699

Wells Fargo

11,887

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records.
Note: Complaint rate is the share of a specific servicer’s call volume that are complaints (e.g., for all calls about OneWest,
9.6% included complaints.)

Source: Survey data through December 31, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines;
Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline.

Servicer Time to Resolve Third-Party Escalations
(Cases Reported Feb. 1, 2011 – Jan. 31, 2012)

Call Abandon Rate (December 2011)
6%

60

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Average Call
Abandon Rate for December: 2.9%

Target: 30 Calendar Days

50
Calendar Days

4%

2%

40
30
20
10
0

0%

Am. Home
Servicing

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

Saxon

SPS

Source: Survey data through December 31, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines;
Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline.

Wells Fargo

Am. Home
Servicing

Resolved
Cases
759
Post-2/1/11

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

Saxon

SPS

Wells Fargo

10,856

1,184

695

4,301

1,254

927

292

172

2,987

Source: MHA Support Centers. GSE and Non-GSE escalations escalated on or after Feb. 1,
2011. Investor denial cases escalated prior to Nov.1, 2011, cases involving bankruptcy and those
that did not require servicer actions are not included in calculation of servicer time to resolve
escalations. Target of 30 calendar days, effective Feb. 1, 2011, includes an estimated 5 days of
processing by MHA Support Centers.

15

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Disposition Path
Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through December 2011 (10 Largest Servicers)
Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled Who Are in the Process of:
Action Not
Allowed –
Action Bankruptcy Borrower
Pending1 in Process Current

Servicer
American Home
Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

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

179

88

178

2,609

56

288

349

674

182

4,603

Bank of America, NA

14,273

7,087

18,943

69,752

1,787

5,025

17,453

25,501

23,791

183,612

CitiMortgage Inc.

1,660

5,922

6,235

29,792

2,011

4,773

5,541

5,599

9,574

71,107

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

1,944

423

969

5,484

101

542

1,156

1,715

1,981

14,315

JP Morgan Chase Bank
NA4

7,036

3,022

21,299

45,635

288

1,451

11,962

19,820

10,867

121,380

Ocwen Loan Services LLC5

5,170

940

8,765

5,820

2,374

404

20

3,909

1,550

28,952

313

332

592

12,035

81

100

1,191

1,777

4,116

20,537

Saxon Mortgage Services,
Inc.

2,146

923

3,071

2,362

360

476

871

4,190

3,926

18,325

Select Portfolio Servicing

1,120

371

1,224

5,551

277

449

1,314

1,389

3,659

15,354

Wells Fargo Bank NA6

3,168

822

11,217

51,336

878

24,070

2,681

16,715

7,014

117,901

37,009
6.2%

19,930
3.3%

72,493
12.2%

230,376
38.6%

8,213
1.4%

37,578
6.3%

42,538
7.1%

81,289
13.6%

66,660
11.2%

596,086
100.0%

3

OneWest Bank

TOTAL
(These 10 Largest
Servicers)

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through December 31, 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 all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
4 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.
5 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
6 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

16

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through January 2012

Disposition Path
Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through December 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

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

American Home Mortgage
Servicing, Inc.

2,527

1,569

13,771

40,994

1,558

2,353

2,824

9,734

2,158

77,488

Bank of America, NA3

33,449

16,074

92,517

149,517

8,333

11,100

40,386

66,128

50,840

468,344

CitiMortgage Inc.

10,723

13,093

19,723

55,446

7,171

17,688

16,103

15,731

18,013

173,691

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

27,365

6,069

37,386

37,190

1,591

5,877

9,689

16,793

16,298

158,258

JP Morgan Chase Bank
NA4

39,436

12,498

159,777

123,041

2,066

39,589

46,265

69,764

22,948

515,384

Ocwen Loan Services LLC5

23,807

5,040

29,960

54,104

9,748

4,816

163

15,403

8,265

151,306

OneWest Bank

5,835

2,594

25,978

27,774

1,079

2,149

5,096

8,583

11,293

90,381

Saxon Mortgage Services,
Inc.

4,483

1,395

6,029

7,698

597

1,101

584

5,633

3,012

30,532

Select Portfolio Servicing

2,440

444

2,932

5,391

370

385

1,321

1,599

2,070

16,952

Wells Fargo Bank NA6

15,368

5,210

49,929

52,198

1,641

32,182

15,684

24,265

15,827

212,304

165,433
8.7%

63,986
3.4%

438,002
23.1%

553,353
29.2%

34,154
1.8%

117,240
6.2%

138,115
7.3%

233,633
12.3%

150,724
8.0%

1,894,640
100.0%

TOTAL
(These 10 Largest
Servicers)

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through December 31, 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 all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
4 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.
5 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
6 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

17

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
the largest servicers participating in MHA. During the fourth quarter of 2011,
Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC. Therefore, there is no servicer assessment for Litton Loan
Servicing, LP for this quarter nor will there be for future quarters.
Subsequent servicer assessments will be published for the remaining largest
servicers, who comprise the majority of MHA activity. 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.
18
(Continued on next page)

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 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 20 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 may 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.

19

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

4th 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

Moderate

Minor

American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
Bank of America, NA
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage, LLC
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
OneWest Bank
Select Portfolio Servicing

For the fourth quarter of 2011, Select Portfolio Servicing and OneWest Bank were determined to need minor improvement in their performance under MHA
guidelines.
American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., GMAC Mortgage, LLC, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Wells Fargo Bank, NA were determined to need moderate
improvement and their performance for the fourth quarter approached the level required for a determination of minor improvement. CitiMortgage, Inc. was also
found to need moderate improvement.
Bank of America, NA was found to need moderate improvement and was found to have substantially remediated previously identified items.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA was found to need moderate improvement for the fourth quarter and has made progress in remediating previously identified items.
Treasury has agreed to release all currently withheld incentives as part of the proposed $25 billion settlement of mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five
largest mortgage servicers, the Federal government, and 49 state attorneys general . Treasury continues to retain the right to withhold incentives in future
periods.
Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the Fourth Quarter 2011 servicer assessment results.

20

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.

Fourth 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







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
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

1.5%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 5%

3.0%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Result
 American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.
 After considering all relevant factors, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. servicer
incentives will not be withheld at this time.

21

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
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance
American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

19%

8%
6%

20%

40%

67%
60%

80%

0%

American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

31

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

60%

60

Sep. 2011
Dec. 2011

72%
79%

80%

100%

0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36
20

40%

June 2011

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

28

20%

Results as of:

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

0

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

85%
86%
88%

American Home
Mortgage
Servicing Inc.

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

22

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.

Fourth 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







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
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

1.0%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

6.0%





-



< 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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Result
 Bank of America, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.
 Treasury has agreed to release Bank of America, NA withheld servicer incentives in
connection with the proposed mortgage servicer settlement.

23

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
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

26%

Bank of
America, NA

35%

20%

40%

80%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

32
29

Bank of
America, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36
20

40

60

20%

40%

60%

Results as of:
June 2011
Sep. 2011
Dec. 2011

76%
81%
72%
79%

80%

100%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

0

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

67%
60%

62%

Bank of
America, NA

67%

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, NA

3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

3.4%
3.6%
3.7%
0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

24

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.

Fourth 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
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

1.0%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

3.0%





-



< 5%

6.8%





-



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
 CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.
 After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will not be
withheld at this time.

25

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

Results as of:
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

34%
35%
43%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

20%

40%

67%
60%

80%

0%

28
27

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

40%

60%

Dec. 2011

72%
79%

80%

0.9%

100%

2.3%
2.1%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

60

Sep. 2011

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

39
36
20

20%

June 2011

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

0

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

75%
81%
83%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

26

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.

Fourth 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







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
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

0.5%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

6.5%





-



< 5%

2.1%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Result
 GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.
 After considering all relevant factors, GMAC Mortgage, LLC servicer incentives will not be
withheld at this time.

27

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

Results as of:
Best
Servicer
Performance

1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

1%
2%
4%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

20%

40%

80%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

12
12

0%

40

40%

60%

60

Sep. 2011
Dec. 2011

72%
79%

80%

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36
20

20%

June 2011

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

62%

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

80%
84%
84%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

67%
60%

88%
90%
90%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

28

MHA Servicer Assessment: JPMorgan 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.

Fourth 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







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
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

0.7%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

10.0%





-



< 5%

3.8%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Result
 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.
 Treasury has agreed to release JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA withheld servicer incentives in
connection with the proposed mortgage servicer settlement.

29

MHA Servicer Assessment: JPMorgan 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:
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

17%
23%
13%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

20%

40%

67%
60%

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

66%
72%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

39
36

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

20

40

60

40%

60%

Sep. 2011
Dec. 2011

83%

72%
79%

80%

100%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

20%

June 2011

0.5%
0.2%
0.2%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%
0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

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.

Fourth 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







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
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

0.7%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

0.2%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Result
 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.
 After considering all relevant factors, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC servicer incentives will not
be withheld at this time.

31

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC1
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

18%
13%
21%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

20%

40%

67%
60%

80%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases2

Best
Servicer
Performance

11
11

40

40%

60%

72%
79%

80%

60

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36
20

20%

Sep. 2011

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

0%

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

June 2011
Dec. 2011

79%
82%
79%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1Beginning in Q4 2011, Litton Loan Servicing, LP is reported with Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC on a consolidated basis.
2The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

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.

Fourth 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







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

0.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

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:
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

6%
5%
10%

OneWest Bank

34%
35%
20%

40%

67%
60%

80%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8
19
17

OneWest Bank

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20

40

0%

20%

40%

60%

60

Sep. 2011

72%
79%

80%

100%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

OneWest Bank

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36
0

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

June 2011
Dec. 2011

79%
77%
82%

OneWest Bank

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

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.

Fourth 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







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

0.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 5%

0.2%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Result
 Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 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:
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

5%
5%
4%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

34%
35%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

20%

40%

88%
90%
90%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

88%
90%
90%
62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

67%
60%

Best
Servicer
Performance

80%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

0%

9
8

Best
Servicer
Performance

Select Portfolio
Servicing

9
8

Select Portfolio
Servicing

20

40

60%

60

Dec. 2011

72%
79%

80%

100%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39
36
0

40%

Sep. 2011

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20%

June 2011

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

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.

Fourth 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







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%

0.0%





-



< 5%

4.0%





-



< 5%

0.8%





-



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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

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.

 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:
1%
2%
4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11%
12%
14%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

34%
35%
20%

40%

67%
60%

80%

0%

25
24

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

40%

60%

Dec. 2011

72%
79%

80%

100%

0.3%
0.5%
0.2%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

60

Sep. 2011

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

39
36
20

20%

June 2011

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

9
8

0

62%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Best
Servicer
Performance

84%
88%
89%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

88%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
1The population in Q3 and Q4 2011 only includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011.

38

MHA Servicer Assessment
Metrics Descriptions

Appendix

conducting staff training on income calculation.

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

Compliance Metrics (quantitative)

Income, allowing for up to a 5% differential from
MHA-C’s calculations. For Income Calculation Error
results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers
to take include, but are not limited to: correcting
income errors exceeding the 5% differential, requiring
the servicer to review their own income calculation
accuracy, enhancing policies and procedures, and

Program Metrics
Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the
rate of conversion to permanent modification for
trials started on or after June 1, 2010, when all
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 cumulative
metric measures servicer response time for
homeowner inquiries escalated to MHA Support
Centers. Effective Feb. 1, 2011, a target of 30
calendar days was established for non-GSE escalation
cases, including an estimated 5 days processing by the
MHA Support Centers. The methodology for
calculating average days to respond to escalated
cases was recently updated to only include non-GSE
cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011. The Q4 2011
figures exclude investor denial cases escalated prior
to 11/1/2011; Q3 figures exclude all investor denial
cases. Cases involving bankruptcy and those that did
not require servicer actions are not included in the
calculation of servicer time to resolve escalations.
% 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 January 2012

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 Home Mortgage Servicing,
Inc
AMS Servicing, LLC
Aurora Loan Services, LLC
Bank of America, N.A.1
Bank United
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
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
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.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2
Lake City Bank
Lake National Bank
Liberty Bank and Trust Co.
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, LLC3
OneWest Bank
ORNL Federal Credit Union
Park View Federal Savings Bank
Pathfinder Bank
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage4
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, NA5
Yadkin Valley Bank

1

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

40

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through January 2012

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

41