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

Report Highlights

Inside:

Over 1.2 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through Making
Home Affordable

SUMMARY RESULTS:

• More than 1 million homeowners have received a permanent modification through the
Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). These homeowners have reduced their
first lien mortgage payments by a median of approximately $538 each month – more than
one-third of their median before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $14.4
billion to date in monthly mortgage payments.
• Homeowners currently in permanent modifications with some form of principal reduction
have been granted a total estimated $6.7 billion from principal reductions through HAMP.
77% of eligible non-GSE borrowers entering HAMP in July have received some form of
principal reduction with their modification.

This Month: Q2 2012 Servicer Assessment Results

• For the second quarter of 2012, two servicers were found to need only minor
improvement on the areas reviewed for program performance, while seven servicers were
found to need moderate improvement. All servicers will need to continue to demonstrate
progress in areas identified in follow-up program reviews.
• Servicers continue to focus attention on areas identified in previous program reviews and,
as a result, are demonstrating considerable improvement in program implementation:
• Mortgage servicers show continued improvement in calculating homeowner
income, which is used to determine a homeowner’s eligibility and modified
payment amount under the program. In Q2 2012, the average income calculation
error rate for the top servicers had fallen below 2 percent.
• Servicers are more effectively evaluating homeowners under program eligibility
criteria as evidenced in the “second look disagree” category, which reflects the
rate at which Treasury’s program reviews disagree with the servicers’ decision not
to assist a homeowner. In Q2 2012, the average second look disagree percentage
for the top servicers had decreased to below 1 percent.
Note: Unless specified, this report reflects program activity for the Making Home Affordable Program and does not
yet include activity relating to HAMP Tier 2. For information and quarterly updates about the Hardest Hit Fund,
please visit the website for the Hardest Hit Fund or the TARP Monthly Report to Congress.

2
Making Home Affordable Program Activity
3
First Lien Modification Activity
Activity for HAFA, Treasury FHA-HAMP, 2MP
4
and UP
5-6
Principal Reduction Activity
First Lien Modification Characteristics
/Modifications by Investor Type
7
HAMP Activity by State
8
HAMP Activity by MSA/
Homeowner Outreach
9
Aged Trials
10
SERVICER RESULTS:
11
First Lien Modification Activity
12
First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity
Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners 13
14
Average Delinquency at Trial Start
15
Conversion Rate
16
Time to Resolve Escalations
Disposition of Homeowners Not in
17-18
HAMP
SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Overview
Servicer Results
Description of Metrics

19-25
26-43
44

APPENDICES:
Participants in MHA Programs

45-46

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 2012

Making Home Affordable Program Activity
In total, the MHA program has completed over 1.2 million first and second lien permanent modifications, HAFA transactions, and UP forbearance plans.

Reported Since
Prior Period

1,060,238

16,767

90,002

3,210

Program

Purpose

60,572

3,786

•

Home Affordable Modification
Program (HAMP)

7,863

368

Provides eligible borrowers the opportunity to lower
their first lien mortgage payment to affordable and
sustainable levels through a uniform loan
modification process.

25,326

997

•

Principal Reduction
Alternative (PRA)

Provides principal forgiveness on eligible
underwater loans that are modified under HAMP.

1,244,001

25,128

•

Second Lien Modification
Program (2MP)

Provides modifications and extinguishments on
second liens when there has been a first lien HAMP
modification on the same property.

•

Home Affordable Foreclosure
Alternatives (HAFA)

Provides transition alternatives to foreclosure in the
form of a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

•

FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP
modification programs

Provides first lien modifications for distressed
borrowers in loans guaranteed through the Federal
Housing Administration and Rural Housing Service.

•

Unemployment Program
(UP)

Provides temporary forbearance of mortgage
principal to enable unemployed borrowers to look for
a new job without fear of foreclosure.

HAMP Permanent
Modifications Started
2MP Modifications
Started
HAFA Agreements
Completed
FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP
Permanent Modifications
Started
UP Forbearance Plans
Started (through June
2012)

1,400

60

Cumulative (Left Axis)
Monthly (Right Axis)

1,200

50

1,000

40

800

30

600

20

400

10

200
July

May

June

Apr

Mar

Feb

Jan 2012

Dec

Nov

Oct

Sep

0
Aug

0
July 2011

Cumulative MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative MHA
Activity1

Monthly MHA Activity (000s)

Program-to-Date

The Making Home Affordable Program was launched in March 2009 with the Home
Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) which provides assistance to struggling
homeowners by lowering monthly first lien mortgage payments to an affordable level.
Additional programs were subsequently rolled out to expand the program reach.

Source: HAMP system of record for HAMP, 2MP, HAFA, FHA-HAMP, and RD-HAMP. UP participation is reported via servicer survey through June 30, 2012.
1 Cumulative activity includes HAMP permanent modifications started, 2MP modifications started, HAFA transactions completed, FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP permanent modifications started, and UP forbearance
plans started. This does not include trial modifications that have cancelled or not yet converted to permanent modification and HAFA agreements started but not yet completed.

2

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

HAMP (First Lien) Modifications

HAMP (First Lien) Trials Started
1,850

Trial
Modifications

Eligible Delinquent

Borrowers2

703,401

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3

2,070,722

All Trials Started

1,897,857

Trials Reported Since June 2012 Report4

14,117

Trial Modifications Cancelled Since June 1, 20105

57,630

Active Trials

66,785

All Permanent Modifications Started

Permanent
Modifications

2,186,234

1,060,238

Permanent Modifications Reported Since
June 2012 Report

16,767

Permanent Modifications Cancelled (Cumulative)6

234,760

Active Permanent Modifications

825,478

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of June 30, 2012, 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 July 31, 2012.
4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime.
5 770,834 cumulative including 713,204 that 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
5,575 loans paid off.

1,835

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

1,750

1,650

1,637

1,663

1,685

1,707

1,728

1,745

1,763

1,782

1,797

1,852

1,869

1,886 1,898

100

1,814

50

1,610
1,576

1,550

1,542
1,507

1,450

1,350

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July
2011
2012

0

Source: HAMP system of record. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any
time. For example, 14,117 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; 12,324 were trials
with a first payment recorded in July 2012.

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)
1,100
All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

(As of June 30, 2012)

Eligible Delinquent Loans1

All Trials Started (000s)

Total
HAMP Eligibility

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

New Trials Started (000s)

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

1,000
900

857

800

763

700
600

608

634

670

699

791

883

910

933

951

1,009
974 994

1,026

1,043

1,060

817

731

500
400

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep
2011

Oct Nov Dec

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July
2012

Source: HAMP system of record.

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

3

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 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.
All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1

90,002

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments

20,664

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2

4,361

Active Second Lien Modifications3

64,977

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:
Second Lien Partially Extinguished

4,686

Second Lien Loan Modifications4

60,291

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

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

85,023

HAFA Agreements Active

10,911

HAFA Transactions Completed

60,572

Completed Transactions – Short Sale

58,969

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu

1,603

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

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

Median Amount of Full Extinguishment

$62,106

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second
Lien Modifications

$8,918

1 Includes

second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for
July 2012 data, though the effective date may occur in August 2012. Number of modifications is net of
cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
2 Includes 397 loans paid off.
3 Includes 3,485 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.
4 Second lien modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate
reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

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 Jun. 2012)

25,326

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required

21,863

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required

3,463

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through Jun. 30, 2012.

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

13,270

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started

7,853

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

4

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

HAMP Principal Reduction
Principal reduction may be offered with any non-GSE HAMP modifications, and servicers are required to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for non-GSE mortgages with a loan-to-value ratio greater
than 115% when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP first lien modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for principal reduction, they are not required to reduce principal as part
of the modification. The MHA Program allows servicers to provide principal reduction on HAMP modifications in two ways: 1) under HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA), principal is reduced to
lower the LTV, the investor is eligible to receive an incentive on the amount of principal reduced, and the reduction vests over a 3-year period and 2) servicers can also offer principal reduction to
homeowners on a HAMP modification outside the requirements of HAMP PRA. If they do, the investor receives no incentive payment for the principal reduction and the principal reduction can be
recognized immediately.
To encourage investors to consider or expand the use of HAMP PRA, Treasury issued program guidance on February 16, 2012 tripling financial incentives under HAMP 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 HAMP PRA and have a trial period plan effective
date on or after March 1, 2012. HAMP PRA can be a feature of a HAMP trial or permanent modification.

HAMP Principal Reduction Activity

Modification Characteristics

HAMP Modifications
with Principal
Reduction Under
PRA1

Other HAMP
Modifications
with Principal
Reduction
Outside of PRA

Total HAMP
Modifications
with Principal
Reduction

All Trial Modifications Started

92,777

29,309

122,086

Trials Reported Since June 2012
Report

3,333

1,440

4,773

Active Trial Modifications

14,336

4,267

18,603

All Permanent Modifications Started

71,122

22,074

93,196

Permanent Modifications Reported
Since June 2012 Report

4,039

1,124

5,163

Active Permanent Modifications

64,027

19,279

83,306

Median Principal Amount Reduced for
Active Permanent Modifications2

$70,124

$51,973

$63,580

Median Principal Amount Reduced for
Active Permanent Modifications (%)3

31.5%

18.0%

26.7%

$5,636,024,871

$1,108,987,136

$6,745,012,007

Total Outstanding Principal Balance
Reduced on Active Permanent
Modifications 2

While the population of loan modifications with principal reduction is still relatively small,
program data indicates that modifications with principal reduction are comprised of more
homeowners seriously delinquent at the time of trial start than the overall population of HAMP
homeowners. Overall, homeowners receiving permanent loan modifications with principal
reduction also have a higher before-modification LTV ratio than those without it.

Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:
- At least 60 days delinquent
- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default

Total HAMP
Modifications
with Principal
All HAMP
Modifications4 Reduction
80%
20%

86%
14%

25%
12%
5%
43%

37%
16%
5%
57%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio:
- Before Modification
120%
- After Modification6
120%

155%
115%

Top three States by Activity5, Percent of Total Activity:
- California
- Florida
- Illinois
Top Three States’ Percent of Total

Active Permanent Modifications – Median before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio:
- Front-End DTI
45.4%
46.8%
1 Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA.
- Back-End DTI
71.8%
62.9%
2 Under HAMP PRA, principal reduction vests over a 3 year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount that may be forgiven.
3 HAMP PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization.
4 Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without principal reduction.
5 Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.
6 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.

5

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

HAMP Principal Reduction
Of all non-GSE loans eligible1 for principal reduction that started a trial in July 2012, 77% included a principal reduction feature, with
59% through the HAMP PRA program. The terms of the $25 billion settlement of mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five
largest mortgage servicers, the Federal government, and 49 state attorneys general, have recently caused servicers to increase use of
non-PRA principal reductions.

Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible
Loans 1

PRA

All Principal Reduction

2

90.0%
80.0%

60%

61%

61%

62%

63%

59%

61%

60%

62%

62%

70.0%

57%

60.0%

44%

50.0%
40.0%

37%

43%

46%

46%

45%

46%

46%

46%

45%

Apr

May

June

July

57%

66%

55%

55%

Feb

Mar

70%

57%

54%

75%

57%

77%

59%

36%

30.0%
20.0%

45%

46%

68%

72%

28%

10.0%
0.0%
Jan-11

Feb

Mar

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan-12

Apr

May

June

July

1 Eligible
2

loans include those receiving evaluation under HAMP PRA guidelines plus loans that did not require an evaluation but received principal reduction on their modification.
All Principal Reduction population consists of trials that have any principal reduction, including those with HAMP PRA.

6

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

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

• Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP
first lien permanent modifications are estimated to total
approximately $14.4 billion, program to date, compared with
unmodified mortgage obligations.

• 67.3% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or
unemployment)
• 11.2% reported excessive obligation
• 3.4% reported an illness of the principal borrower

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active permanent
first lien modifications is $538.13, or 38% of the median monthly
payment before modification.

• Active permanent modifications feature the following modification steps:
• 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.

• 97.3% feature interest rate reductions
• 60.1% offer term extension
• 31.5% include principal forbearance

Modifications by Investor Type (Large Servicers)

Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications
Before
Modification

After
Modification Median Decrease

Servicer
Bank of America, NA

GSE

Private

Portfolio

Total Active
Modifications

69,697

61,063

10,882

141,642

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio1

45.4%

31.0%

-14.6 pct pts

CitiMortgage, Inc.

32,634

5,578

17,089

55,301

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

25,741

6,192

12,818

44,751

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2

71.8%

53.8%

-14.9 pct pts

Homeward Residential

1,526

27,336

0

28,862

$1,426.62

$818.93

-$538.13

JPMorgan Chase , NA

69,353

55,332

26,396

151,081

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

13,644

58,119

1,581

73,344

OneWest Bank

15,742

17,836

2,966

36,544

521

17,004

2,919

20,444

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

56,295

18,058

51,803

126,156

Other HAMP Servicers

170,895

26,100

17,143

214,138

Total

456,048

292,618

143,597

892,263

Select Portfolio Servicing

Loan Characteristic

Median Monthly Housing Payment3

Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or
condo fees) to monthly gross income.
2 Ratio of total monthly debt payments (including mortgage principal and interest, taxes, insurance,
homeowners association and/or condo fees, plus payments on installment debts, junior liens,
alimony, car lease payments and investment property payments) to monthly gross income. Borrowers
who have a back-end debt-to-income ratio of greater than 55% are required to seek housing
counseling under program guidelines.
3 Principal and interest payment.
1

Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

7

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 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

44

366

410

0.0%

MT

78

943

1,021

0.1%

AL

402

4,520

4,922

0.6%

NC

1,273

14,652

15,925

1.8%

AR

166

1,753

1,919

0.2%

ND

6

126

132

0.0%

AZ

1,680

33,868

35,548

4.0%

NE

116

1,084

1,200

0.1%

CA

15,368

210,748

226,116

25.3%

NH

305

3,675

3,980

0.4%

CO

893

11,517

12,410

1.4%

NJ

2,605

26,430

29,035

3.3%

CT

998

10,353

11,351

1.3%

NM

275

2,693

2,968

0.3%

DC

119

1,429

1,548

0.2%

NV

1,093

19,237

20,330

2.3%

DE

207

2,428

2,635

0.3%

NY

4,438

40,272

44,710

5.0%

FL

8,471

99,534

108,005

12.1%

OH

1,572

17,238

18,810

2.1%

GA

2,437

29,743

32,180

3.6%

OK

205

HI

299

3,141

3,440

0.4%

OR

824

IA

163

1,974

2,137

0.2%

PA

1,600

ID

244

3,139

3,383

0.4%

RI

283

IL

3,437

43,186

46,623

5.2%

SC

IN

653

7,640

8,293

0.9%

SD

KS

182

1,910

2,092

0.2%

TN

767

KY

275

2,967

3,242

0.4%

TX

2,101

LA

436

4,527

4,963

0.6%

UT

435

1,881

2,086

0.2%

9,035

9,859

1.1%

16,632

18,232

2.0%

4,058

4,341

0.5%

641

7,483

8,124

0.9%

21

294

315

0.0%

8,262

9,029

1.0%

21,869

23,970

2.7%

7,625

8,060

0.9%

MA

1,823

19,788

21,611

2.4%

VA

1,520

19,502

21,022

2.4%

MD

2,143

26,093

28,236

3.2%

VT

60

700

760

0.1%

ME

219

2,271

2,490

0.3%

WA

1,512

17,053

18,565

2.1%

MI

1,618

25,469

27,087

3.0%

WI

693

7,746

8,439

0.9%

MN

822

13,254

14,076

1.6%

WV

99

1,087

1,186

0.1%

MO

730

8,066

8,796

1.0%

WY

39

399

438

0.0%

MS

215

2,891

3,106

0.3%

Other2

180

2,927

3,107

0.3%

1

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

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

5,000 and lower

20,001 – 35,000

5,001 – 10,000

35,001 and higher

10,001 – 20,000

Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State

Source: 2nd Quarter 2012
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

8

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through July 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

5,283

65,760

71,043

8.0%

5,624

53,762

59,386

6.7%

3,881

42,916

46,797

5.2%

3,312

41,925

45,237

5.1%

42,198

44,745

5.0%

2,024

27,740

29,764

3.3%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA

1,206

27,154

28,360

3.2%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA

1,925

24,050

25,975

2.9%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA

1,525

18,176

19,701

2.2%

901

15,791

16,692

1.9%

1,058

15,414

16,472

1.8%

979

15,432

16,411

1.8%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA

1,087

14,884

15,971

1.8%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH

1,256

14,265

15,521

1.7%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville,
CA

July

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

3,259,519

72,007

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

1,563,809

37,689

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

2,547

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV

Program to
Date

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures
Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by
Treasury and Partners (cumulative)
Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events
(cumulative)
Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1
Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov
(July 2012)
Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative)

74
67,970
8,420,777
2,526,420
153,671,976

1

985

14,012

14,997

1.7%

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. Bank of America, NA restated the
number of solicitations from the previous month resulting in a reduction of cumulative solicitations reported.

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/

9

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

Aged Trials1

200,000

190,412

The number of active trials lasting 6 months or longer is approximately 10,300.
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

15,815

13,177 12,601 11,724 11,440
10,286

0

May June July
2010

Aug Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan Feb March Apr May
2011

June July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan Feb March Apr
2012

May June July

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

trials initiated at least six months ago. See page 11 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.

10

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

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer
As of
June 30, 2012

Cumulative

As of July 31, 2012

Estimated
Eligible 60+ Day
Delinquent
Borrowers1

Trial Plan
Offers
Extended2

All HAMP
Trials
Started3

All HAMP
Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Bank of America, NA

131,686

546,740

367,660

CitiMortgage, Inc.

48,325

211,733

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

24,335

Homeward Residential

Active Trial
Modifications3

Active Trial
Modifications
Lasting 6 Months
or Longer4

Active
Permanent
Modifications3

173,057

13,478

5,015

128,164

139,550

64,409

3,535

936

51,766

89,460

73,138

55,236

2,647

50

42,104

24,847

46,516

43,208

35,910

1,727

127

27,135

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

91,020

359,695

319,878

174,575

12,758

933

138,323

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

65,266

101,823

149,644

92,785

6,862

842

66,482

OneWest Bank

20,627

80,676

63,679

40,466

2,902

76

33,642

Select Portfolio Servicing

8,535

72,452

46,635

26,610

832

27

19,612

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

90,547

310,428

271,267

142,279

11,562

955

114,594

Other Servicers

198,213

251,199

423,198

254,911

10,482

1,325

203,656

Total

703,401

2,070,722

1,897,857

1,060,238

66,785

10,286

825,478

Servicer

1 Estimated

eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers based on survey
information as submitted by servicers as of June 30, 2012, include those in
conventional loans:
 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.
 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a oneunit property, $934,200 on a two-unit property, $1,129,250 on a threeunit property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.
 on a property that was owner-occupied at origination.
 originated on or before January 1, 2009.
Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers exclude:

 those in FHA and VA loans.
 those in loans that are current or less than 60 days delinquent, which
may be eligible for HAMP if a borrower is in imminent default.
 those borrowers with debt-to-income ratios less than 31% or a
negative NPV test.
 owners of vacant properties or properties otherwise excluded.
 HAMP Trials and Permanent Modifications disqualified from HAMP.
 unemployed borrowers.
Exclusions for DTI and NPV are estimated using market analytics.
2 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through
July 31, 2012.

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.

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

11

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

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1
Principal Reduction Alternative
(PRA)2

HAMP First Lien Modifications

Second Lien
Modification
(2MP)

Home Affordable Foreclosure
Alternatives (HAFA)

Trials
Started3

Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Trials
Started3

Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Second Lien
Modifications
Started4

Agreements
Started5

Agreements
Completed

Bank of America, NA

367,660

173,057

15,225

12,906

29,125

17,299

16,200

CitiMortgage, Inc.

139,550

64,409

2,303

1,826

11,412

364

272

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

73,138

55,236

2,396

1,521

4,430

3,408

2,450

Homeward Residential

43,208

35,910

0

0

N/A

1,072

513

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

319,878

174,575

22,872

16,879

25,160

33,010

22,053

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

149,644

92,785

22,819

16,019

N/A

2,864

1,355

OneWest Bank

63,679

40,466

5,455

4,192

2,653

3,152

1,670

Select Portfolio Servicing

46,635

26,610

192

163

N/A

2,781

2,114

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

271,267

142,279

18,971

15,417

13,660

15,734

9,769

Other Servicers

423,198

254,911

2,544

2,199

3,562

5,339

4,176

1,897,857

1,060,238

92,777

71,122

90,002

85,023

60,572

Servicer

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 7 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

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

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

12

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

Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, July 2011 – June 2012
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%

96%

93%

99%

91%

90%

88%

90%

95%
83%

82%

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%

98%
74%

78%

72%

77%

74%

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

82%

74%

70%

30%
20%
10%
0%
Bank of America CitiMortgage

GMAC

Homeward
Residential

Right Party Contact Ratio2

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

1 Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before Jan. 1, 2009; excludes loans with current unpaid principal balances greater than current conforming loan limits, 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. Treasury has expanded HAMP's eligibility criteria to include a "Tier 2" evaluation
designed to provide help for borrowers with a financial hardship whose debt-to-income ratio is below 31 percent, who have properties occupied by a tenant or who have vacant properties that the borrower intends to rent. Servicers began
accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification requests as of 6/1/2012 and some servicers have begun to include HAMP Tier 2 eligible loans in the outreach survey data shown here.
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 9 largest participating servicers as of June 30, 2012.

13

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through July 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 right party 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

Days

150

100

50

0
Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

Homeward
Residential

JPMorgan
Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

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.

14

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

Conversion Rate1
Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010, all trials must be started using verified income documentation. Of eligible trials started on or after June 1, 2010,
87% have converted to permanent modification with an average trial length of 3.5 months. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers initiated trials using stated income
information. Of trials started prior to June 1, 2010, 43% have converted to permanent modification.
Average Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10
87% Converted to Permanent Modification
4% Pending Processing or Decision
100%

90%
83%

85%

85%

CitiMortgage

GMAC

88%

89%

90%

89%

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

81%

Conversion Rate

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%
Bank of America

Homeward
Residential

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

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.

1

15

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

Servicer Time to Resolve Non-GSE Escalations: Average Resolution Time by Quarter in Which Escalations were Resolved1

Servicers are required to resolve borrower inquiries and disputes that are escalated by the MHA Support Centers. Escalated cases include allegations
that the servicer did not properly assess the homeowner according to program guidelines, inappropriately denied the homeowner for applicable
MHA program(s), or initiated or continued inappropriate foreclosure actions. Effective February 1, 2011, the servicers are directed to review and
resolve non-GSE escalated cases within 30 calendar days from receipt of the case by the escalating party. In the last two quarters, most of the nine
largest servicers’ non-GSE resolved cases have an average resolution time below the 30 day target.
Q4 2011

Q1 2012

Q2 2012

Current Quarter

50

Target: 30 Calendar Days2

45
40
35

Days

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

Homeward
Residential

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

Homeward
Residential

JPMorgan
Chase

OneWest

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

SPS

Wells Fargo

6,273

872

356

38

1,980

194

485

6

1,498

7,324

620

537

1,025

3,157

1,573

651

236

2,794

Total

13,597

1,492

893

1,063

5,137

1,767

1,136

242

4,292

Total

234

41

21

20

108

33

9

4

262

GSE Cases
Resolved Cases3 Non-GSE Cases
Active Cases

GMAC

1 Non-GSE

escalations only; excludes cases escalated to the MHA Support Centers but not yet escalated to servicers. Average resolution time calculation excludes cases referred to servicers prior to February 1, 2011, 'Investor denial' cases referred to
servicers between February 1, 2011 and November 1, 2011, cases involving bankruptcy, and cases that did not require servicer actions.
2 Target of 30 calendar days includes an estimated 5 days of processing by MHA Support Centers.
3 Resolved cases include all escalations resolved on or after February 1, 2011 through July 31, 2012 and exclude those that did not require servicer actions.
Source: MHA Support Centers.

16

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

Disposition Path
Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through June 2012 (Largest Servicers)
Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled:

Servicer
Bank of America, NA

Action Not
Allowed –
Action Bankruptcy Borrower
Pending1 in Process Current

Short Sale/
Total
Alternative Payment
Deed-in- Foreclosure Foreclosure (As of June
Modification
Plan2 Loan Payoff
Lieu
Starts
Completions
2012)

8,565

6,250

15,989

68,075

1,743

5,936

22,089

20,577

29,431

178,655

CitiMortgage Inc.

418

6,366

7,879

27,639

1,917

5,213

6,036

4,972

10,925

71,365

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

267

322

1,141

7,024

6

635

1,364

1,519

2,301

14,579

Homeward Residential

179

107

294

2,842

73

539

418

652

182

5,286

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

4,233

3,577

21,878

40,505

1,151

2,026

14,232

15,010

13,255

115,867

Ocwen Loan Services, LLC

2,892

2,268

4,874

22,394

2,461

475

803

7,846

3,384

47,397

OneWest Bank

149

245

506

12,072

49

106

1,250

1,508

4,328

20,213

Select Portfolio Servicing

859

285

1,193

5,632

211

518

1,425

991

4,113

15,227

9,291

4,743

9,238

35,800

622

6,697

8,077

16,372

25,430

116,270

26,853

24,163

62,992

221,983

8,233

22,145

55,694

69,447

93,349

584,859

4.6%

4.1%

10.8%

38.0%

1.4%

3.8%

9.5%

11.9%

16.0%

100%

Wells Fargo Bank, NA
TOTAL
(These Largest
Servicers)

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

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through June 30, 2012. 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.
Note: Excludes cancellations pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios.
See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs.

17

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

Disposition Path
Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through June 2012 (Largest Servicers)
Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification:

Servicer

Action
Pending1

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy Borrower
in Process Current

Short Sale/
Total
Alternative Payment
Deed-in- Foreclosure Foreclosure (As of June
Modification
Plan2 Loan Payoff
Lieu
Starts
Completions
2012)

Bank of America, NA

29,888

16,723

93,709

170,888

9,897

17,685

51,457

58,332

60,283

508,862

CitiMortgage Inc.

1,699

15,846

31,397

60,455

8,038

20,298

19,981

16,569

22,315

196,598

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

7,611

4,621

42,270

50,717

615

8,797

13,239

15,590

17,304

160,764

Homeward Residential

2,529

1,918

15,283

45,006

1,025

4,983

3,646

9,530

2,051

85,971

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

21,176

16,650

145,382

136,165

7,254

56,327

63,121

57,905

32,785

536,765

Ocwen Loan Services, LLC

14,267

7,253

28,115

102,248

10,278

4,462

4,907

20,455

13,572

205,557

OneWest Bank

3,860

2,260

30,471

37,312

934

3,213

6,420

9,053

12,681

106,204

Select Portfolio Servicing

2,121

444

3,280

6,690

313

543

2,046

1,418

2,783

19,638

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

24,836

9,004

50,607

46,532

1,711

17,602

29,621

25,675

31,881

237,469

107,987

74,719

440,514

656,013

40,065

133,910

194,438

214,527

195,655

2,057,828

5.2%

3.6%

21.4%

31.9%

1.9%

6.5%

9.4%

10.4%

9.5%

100.0%

TOTAL
(These Largest
Servicers)

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through June 30, 2012. 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.
Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios.
See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs.

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
• Offer Not Accepted by
Borrower/Request
Withdrawn

18

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, and 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.
19
(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 21 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 44 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.

20

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

2nd Quarter 2012 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

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

For the second quarter of 2012, OneWest Bank and Select Portfolio Servicing were determined to need minor improvement in their performance under MHA
guidelines.
Bank of America, NA, CitiMortgage, Inc. and GMAC Mortgage, LLC, Homeward Residential, JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, and Wells Fargo
Bank, NA were determined to need moderate improvement.

Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the Second Quarter 2012 servicer assessment results.

21

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 4th Quarter 20101-2nd Quarter 2012
Second Look % Disagree: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer’s MHA determination. Treasury’s
benchmark is that the second look % disagree must be less than 4%. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury covered the
first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth quarter of
2010) through the most recent assessment.
Bank of America

CitMortgage

GMAC

Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase

Litton

Ocwen

One West

Select Porfolio Servicing

Wells Fargo

Average

8.0%
7.0%
6.0%

Benchmark: 4%
5.0%
4.0%
3.0%
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
4Q10
1 The

1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

1Q12

2Q12

first servicer assessment covered the first quarter of 2011. The

22

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 4th Quarter 2010-2nd Quarter 2012
Second Look % Unable to Determine: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer’s MHA determination.
Treasury’s benchmark is that the second look % unable to determine must be less than 10%. The first servicer assessment results published by
Treasury covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments
(fourth quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment.
Bank of America

CitMortgage

GMAC

Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase

Litton

Ocwen

One West

Select Porfolio Servicing

Wells Fargo

Average

30%

25%

20%

Benchmark: 10%

15%

10%

5%

0%
4Q10

1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

1Q12

2Q 2012

23

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 4th Quarter 2010-2nd Quarter 2012
Income Calculation Error %: Percentage of loans for which MHA-C’s income calculation differs from the servicer’s by more than 5%. Treasury’s
benchmark is that the income calculation error % must be less than 5%. Correctly calculating homeowner monthly income is a critical component of
evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an accurate modification payment. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury
covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth
quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment.
Bank of America

CitMortgage

GMAC

Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase

Litton

Ocwen

One West

Select Porfolio Servicing

Wells Fargo

Average

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

Benchmark: 5%
10%

5%

0%
4Q10

1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

1Q12

2Q12

24

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: 4th Quarter 2010 – 2nd Quarter 2012
Second Look % Disagree1

Servicer
Bank of America,
NA
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage,
LLC
Homeward
Residential
JPMorgan Chase
Bank, NA
Litton Loan
Servicing, LP4
Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC
OneWest Bank
Select Portfolio
Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank,
NA8

Second Look % Unable to Determine2

Income Calculation Error Rate3

Q4
2010

Q1
2011

Q2
2011

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
Q2
2012 2012

Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2010 2011 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012

Q4
Q1
2010 2011

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
2012

Q2
2012

2.4%

1.5%

0.8%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

19.6% 18.8% 8.2% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0%

22.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0%

6.0%

5.0%

2.0%

4.0%

2.0%

0.5%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

12.3% 13.3% 5.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0%

8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 6.0%

3.0%

4.0%

1.0%

4.0%

4.7%

1.7%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

22.7% 8.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0%

29.0% 6.0%

4.2%

4.2%

6.5%

4.0%

6.0%

5.3%

1.0%

0.7%

0.0%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

29.3% 5.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.5%

30.0% 14.0% 5.3%

2.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

3.9%

1.6%

1.2%

0.0%

0.7%

0.2%

0.0%

16.0% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7%

31.0% 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0%

0.0%

6.0%

3.7%

3.3%

1.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

5.7% 6.3% 2.7% 2.0%

6.0%

6.3%

6.7%

2.7%

0.0%

0.7%

1.0%

1.0%

4.7%

6.7%

0.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

2.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

1.7%

1.2%

0.4%

0.4%

0.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

6.0%

Q2
2011

2.0%

1.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

24.7% 10.3% 3.0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

18.0% 33.0% 2.0%

2.0%

2.0%

3.0%

3.0%

0.0%

12.3% 3.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

11.0% 11.0% 2.0%

2.0%

0.0%

3.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.5%

17.0% 2.3% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0%

22.0% 15.0% 10.0% 3.2%

1.0%

3.0%

2.0%

0.3%

1.0%

6.8% 6.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8%

27.0% 27.0% 4.4%

4.0%

2.0%

0.0%

5.5%

1

Second Look % Disagree: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer’s MHA determination.
Unable to Determine: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer’s MHA
determination.
3
Income Calculation Error %: Percentage of loans for which MHA-C’s income calculation differs from the servicer’s by more than 5%.
Correctly calculating homeowner monthly income is a critical component of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an
accurate modification payment.
4 Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.
2 Second Look %

25

MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, NA
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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



1.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

0.1%





-



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

Q2 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Bank of America, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, NA servicer incentives will

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

26

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
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, NA

40%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40%
0%

20%

40%

56%

56%
60%

67%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
8
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

29
27
26

0

10

70%

20

30

40

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

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

Bank of
America, NA

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Jun. 2012

82%
80%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, NA

Mar. 2012

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011

81%
84%
84%

Bank of
America, NA

67%

Results as of:

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
1.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

27

MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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

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



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

Rating Legend



1.0%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 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

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

Benchmark

Q2 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

28

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:
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

29%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

43%
37%

40%
0%

20%

40%

56%
60%

67%

8
7
7
27
26
24

0

10

70%

20

30

40

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.1%
0.5%
0.5%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Jun. 2012

82%
80%

Best
Servicer
Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Mar. 2012

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011

83%
84%
85%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

29

MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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

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



0.5%



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

6.0%





-



< 5%

1.4%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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

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

Benchmark

Q2 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, GMAC Mortgage, LLC servicer incentives will

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

30

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

4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

4%
1%
3%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40%
0%

20%

40%

56%
60%

67%

80%

8
7
7
12
12
12

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

40

Dec. 2011
Mar. 2012

84%
84%
84%

Jun. 2012

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

90%
90%
90%

82%
80%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

0.1%
0.0%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

31

MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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



1.0%



< 10%

0.5%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 5%

5.0%





-



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

Q2 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Homeward Residential has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, Homeward Residential servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

32

MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

6%
8%
6%

Homeward
Residential

40%
0%

20%

40%

56%

67%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

8
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

31
32
31

Homeward
Residential

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

40

Mar. 2012
Jun. 2012

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011

88%
89%
89%

Homeward
Residential

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Results as of:

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

82%
80%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Homeward
Residential

0.1%
0.1%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

33

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.

Second Quarter 2012
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



0.0%



< 10%

1.7%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.6%





-



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

Q2 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

34

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:
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

13%
10%
10%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20%

40%

56%
60%

67%

80%

8
7
7

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

30

40

75%

Best
Servicer
Performance

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

20

Jun. 2012
86%
87%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

36
34
33

10

Mar. 2012

82%
80%

70%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

0

Dec. 2011

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Best
Servicer
Performance

83%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, NA

40%
0%

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

35

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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

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



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

Rating Legend



1.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

3.0%





-



< 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

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

Benchmark

Q2 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

36

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:
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

21%
17%
14%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20%

40%

56%
60%

67%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

8
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

36
34
33
0

82%
80%

70%

10

20

30

40

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.5%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Jun. 2012

79%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11
10
9

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Mar. 2012

82%
80%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011

79%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

40%
0%

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

11.2%
3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.
1Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC received approximately 6,550 transferred loans resulting in an increase in the percent of missing modification status reports for the June 2012
reporting period.

37

MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

0.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 5%

0.1%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q2 Results
 OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

38

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:
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

10%
4%
3%

OneWest Bank

40%
20%

40%

56%
60%

67%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

8
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

17
16
15

OneWest Bank

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

40

Mar. 2012

89%
89%

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011
Jun. 2012

82%

OneWest Bank

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

82%
80%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

OneWest Bank

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

39

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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

0.5%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

0.9%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Benchmark

Q2 Results
 Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

40

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:
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

4%
7%
2%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40%
0%

20%

40%

56%
60%

67%

Best
Servicer
Performance

90%
90%
90%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

90%
89%
89%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

70%

75%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

8
7
7

Select Portfolio
Servicing

0.0%
0.2%
0.1%

0

10

20

30

40

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

8
7
7

36
34
33

Jun. 2012

82%
80%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Mar. 2012

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

41

MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, NA
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

Second Quarter 2012
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



1.0%



< 10%

0.8%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

2.2%





-



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

Q2 Results

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

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

will not be withheld at this time.

42

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:
4%
1%
2%

Best
Servicer
Performance

14%
12%
8%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

Worst
Servicer
Performance

56%

20%

40%

60%

67%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

8
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

24
25
24

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

36
34
33

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

40

Mar. 2012
Jun. 2012

79%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

80%

Dec. 2011

89%
90%
90%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

40%
0%

90%
90%
90%

Best
Servicer
Performance

82%
80%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Wells Fargo
Bank, NA

0.2%
0.1%
0.1%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
0%

3%

3.7%
11.2%
5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

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.

43

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 updated to only include non-GSE cases
escalated on or after 2/1/2011. The figures exclude
investor denial cases escalated prior to 11/1/2011.
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.

44

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 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.
AMS Servicing, LLC
Aurora Loan Services, LLC
Bank of America, NA1
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, NA
Franklin Credit Management
Corporation
Franklin Savings
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
Homeward Residential2
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, NA3
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, LLC4
OneWest Bank
ORNL Federal Credit Union
Park View Federal Savings Bank
Pathfinder Bank
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage5
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
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, NA6
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 Formerly American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage
Corporation.
4 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
5 Formerly National City Bank.
6 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

45

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 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, NA 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.

46