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

Report Highlights
Over 1.3 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through
Making Home Affordable
• More than 1.1 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 $542 each month – more than one-third of their median
before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $16.2 billion to date in monthly mortgage
payments.
• Nearly 100,000 second lien modifications have been started through the Second Lien Modification
Program (2MP), and over 80,000 homeowners have exited their homes through a short sale or deedin-lieu of foreclosure with assistance from the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program
(HAFA).
• Homeowners currently in HAMP permanent modifications with some form of principal reduction
have been granted an estimated $8 billion in principal reduction. 74% of eligible non-GSE borrowers
entering HAMP in October received some form of principal reduction with their modification.

This Month: Q3 2012 Servicer Assessment Results
•

•

For the third 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 continue to appropriately calculate homeowner income, which is used
to determine a homeowner’s eligibility and modified payment amount under the
program. In Q3 2012, the average income calculation error rate for the top servicers was 3
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 Q3 2012, the average second look disagree percentage for the top
servicers was below 1 percent.

Note: This report reflects program activity for the Making Home Affordable Program. Unless specified, this report does not yet
include activity relating to HAMP Tier 2, in order to allow adequate time to fully implement Tier 2 reporting into the HAMP
system of record. Tier 2 activity will be reported in the coming months. 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.

Inside:
SUMMARY RESULTS:
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
SERVICER RESULTS:
First Lien Modification Activity
10
First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity
11
Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners
12
Average Delinquency at Trial Start
13
Conversion Rate
14
Time to Resolve Escalations
15
Disposition of Homeowners Not in
HAMP
16-17
SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Overview
Servicer Results
Description of Metrics

18-24
25-42
43

APPENDICES:
Participants in MHA Programs

44-45

Making Home Affordable
Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Making Home Affordable Program Activity
In total, the MHA program has completed over 1.3 million first and second lien permanent modifications, HAFA transactions, and UP forbearance plans .

Reported Since
Prior Period

1,106,599

16,003

99,157

2,235

Program

Purpose

80,263

4,840

•

Home Affordable Modification
Program (HAMP)

9,893

793

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

28,071

1,040

•

Principal Reduction
Alternative (PRA)

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

1,323,983

24,911

•

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 Transactions
Completed
FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP
Permanent Modifications
Started
UP Forbearance Plans
Started (through
September 2012)

Cumulative (Left Axis)

1,400

60

Monthly (Right Axis)

1,200

50

1,000

40

800

30

600

20

400

10

200
Oct

Sep

July

Aug

May

June

Apr

Mar

Feb

Jan 2012

Dec

Nov

0
Oct

0
Sep 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 September 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 October 2012

HAMP (First Lien) Modifications

HAMP (First Lien) Trials Started
2,000

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

Total
Eligible Delinquent Loans1

(As of September 30,
2012)

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2

Trial
Modifications

Permanent
Modifications

1 Estimated

2,159,397
720,482

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3

2,151,335

All Trials Started

1,941,028

Trials Reported Since September 2012 Report4

13,403

Trial Modifications Cancelled Since June 1, 20105

61,529

Active Trials

61,928

All Permanent Modifications Started

1,901

1,900

1,106,599

Permanent Modifications Reported Since
September 2012 Report

16,003

Permanent Modifications Cancelled (Cumulative)6

265,764

Active Permanent Modifications

840,835

1,834

All Trials Started (000s)

HAMP Eligibility

100

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

1,800
1,726

1,743

1,761

1,780

1,795

1,851

1,869

1,917

1,929

1,941

1,887

1,812

1,705

1,700
1,660

50

1,683

1,635

1,600

New Trials Started (000s)

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

1,500
1,400

0
May June July
2011

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov Dec

Jan Feb
2012

Mar

Apr May June July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Source: HAMP system of record. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any
time. For example, 13,403 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; 11,663 were trials
with a first payment recorded in October 2012.

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of September 30, 2012, include conventional

1,200
All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

1,107
1,091
loans:
1,077
1,100
 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.
1,043 1,060
1,026
 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a one-unit property, $934,200 on a two-unit property,
994 1,009
974
$1,129,250 on a three-unit property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.
1,000
951
 on a property that was owner-occupied at origination.
910 933
 originated on or before January 1, 2009.
883
900
857
Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans exclude:
817
 FHA and VA loans.
791
800
763
 loans that are current or less than 60 days delinquent, which may be eligible for HAMP if a borrower is in imminent
731
default.
2 The estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers are those in HAMP-eligible loans, minus estimated exclusions of
700
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
600
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
500
market analytics.
3 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through October 31, 2012. Some servicers have begun
to include trial plans offered under the HAMP Tier 2 eligibility requirements. The reduction is due to Wells Fargo, N.A.
400
restating the number of trial plan offers extended from the previous month.
May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct
4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime.
2011
2012
5 772,501 cumulative including 710,972 that had trial start dates prior to June 1, 2010 when Treasury implemented a
Source: HAMP system of record.
verified income requirement.
6 A permanent modification is canceled when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Includes
8,080 loans paid off.
Note: Unless specified, exhibits in this report refer to HAMP first lien modification activity.

3

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

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) 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. Second lien
modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate
reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.
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.

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 transactions completed, the
homeowner began a HAMP trial modification but later requested a HAFA agreement
or was disqualified from HAMP.
All HAFA Transactions Started1

107,117

HAFA Transactions Cancelled

15,518

99,157

HAFA Agreements Active2

11,336

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments

24,617

HAFA Transactions Completed

80,263

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2
Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:
Active Second Lien Modifications3

6,452

All Second Lien Modifications Started

(Cumulative)1

Active Second Lien Modifications involving Partial Lien
Extinguishments

68,088

Completed Transactions – Short Sale

78,260

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu

2,003

1

5,765

Second Lien Extinguishment Details
Median Amount of Full Extinguishment

$61,960

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second Lien
Modifications

$9,125

1 Includes

second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for
October 2012 data, though the effective date may occur in November 2012. Number of modifications
is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
2 Includes 934 loans paid off.
3 Includes 4,340 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.

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity

All HAFA Agreements Started includes HAFA Agreements Active, HAFA Transactions Completed, and
HAFA Transactions Cancelled.
2 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.

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity
The Treasury MHA Unemployment Program (UP) provides a temporary forbearance to
homeowners who are unemployed. Under Treasury guidelines, unemployed homeowners
must be considered for a minimum of 12 months’ forbearance.
All UP Forbearance Plans Started (through Sep. 2012)

28,071

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required

24,181

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required

3,890

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

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

16,621

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started

9,882

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

4

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

HAMP Principal Reduction
Principal reduction may be offered to 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

All Trial Modifications Started

Modification Characteristics

HAMP Modifications
with Earned
Principal Reduction
Under PRA1

HAMP
Modifications
with Upfront
Principal
Reduction
Outside of PRA

Total HAMP
Modifications
with Principal
Reduction

104,191

33,361

137,552

Trials Reported Since September 2012
Report

3,467

1,342

4,809

Active Trial Modifications

14,060

3,687

17,747

All Permanent Modifications Started

81,709

26,655

108,364

Permanent Modifications Reported
Since September 2012 Report

4,054

1,490

5,544

Active Permanent Modifications

71,969

23,370

95,339

Median Principal Amount Reduced for
Active Permanent Modifications2

$71,890

$54,466

$65,693

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

31.8%

18.0%

28.1%

$6,520,559,397

$1,492,181,669

$8,012,741,066

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.
Total HAMP
Modifications
All HAMP
with Principal
Modifications4 Reduction
Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:
- At least 60 days delinquent
80%
85%
- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default
20%
15%
Top three States by Activity5, Percent of Total Activity:
- California
- Florida
- Illinois
Top Three States’ Percent of Total

26%
12%
5%
43%

36%
16%
5%
57%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio:
- Before Modification
120%
- After Modification6
119%

154%
115%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio:
- Front-End DTI
45.5%
46.6%
1 Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA.
- Back-End DTI
71.5%
62.3%
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 October 2012

HAMP Principal Reduction
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 the use of non-PRA principal reductions. Of non-GSE loans eligible1 for
principal reduction that started a trial in October 2012, 74% included a principal reduction feature. Only 56% offered principal reduction through
the HAMP PRA program. The remaining HAMP trial modifications with a principal reduction feature were granted outside the requirements of
HAMP PRA, where the investor does not receive a financial incentive for the principal reduction. In recent months, principal reductions granted
outside of the HAMP PRA program are likely attributable to the National Mortgage Settlement.
PRA

All Principal Reduction

2

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

90.0%

81%

80.0%

70.0%

57%

60.0%

47% 46% 46% 46% 57%
44% 45%

50.0%

40.0%

37%
43%

62% 63%
60% 61% 61%
62% 61%
59% 61% 60%

68% 66%

69%

72%

74%

77%

75% 74%

63% 64%
54% 54% 56% 53% 56%

59%

56%

46% 46% 46% 45%

36%

30.0%

28%
20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
Jan-11

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan-12

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

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 October 2012

Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics
• Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP
first lien permanent modifications are estimated to total
approximately $16.2 billion, program to date, compared with
unmodified mortgage obligations.

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent
modifications are:
• 67.7% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or
unemployment)
• 10.9% 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 $542.33, 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.

• 97.1% feature interest rate reductions
• 60.9% offer term extension
• 32.0% 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, N.A.

GSE

Private

Portfolio

Total Active
Modifications

67,054

54,092

10,758

131,904

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio1

45.5%

31.0%

-14.8 pct pts

CitiMortgage, Inc.

32,847

5,622

16,978

55,447

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2

71.5%

53.3%

-15.0 pct pts

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

25,630

6,313

12,917

44,860

Homeward Residential, Inc.

5,613

28,001

0

33,614

$1,424.97

$814.05

-$542.33

JPMorgan Chase N.A.

66,595

57,082

27,302

150,979

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

13,548

60,085

1,423

75,056

OneWest Bank

15,661

18,014

2,966

36,641

512

22,749

2,855

26,116

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

56,529

20,251

53,402

130,182

Other HAMP Servicers

173,256

27,017

17,691

217,964

Total

457,245

299,226

146,292

902,763

Select Portfolio Servicing

Loan Characteristic

Median Monthly Housing Payment3
1

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

Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

7

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

HAMP Activity by State

State

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

Modification Activity by State

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

AK

46

374

420

0.0%

MT

65

957

1,022

0.1%

AL

399

4,554

4,953

0.5%

NC

1,209

14,904

16,113

1.8%

AR

125

1,793

1,918

0.2%

ND

11

120

131

0.0%

AZ

1,571

33,767

35,338

3.9%

NE

94

1,101

1,195

0.1%

CA

14,163

216,244

230,407

25.5%

NH

293

3,734

4,027

0.4%

CO

832

11,777

12,609

1.4%

NJ

2,361

26,966

29,327

3.2%

CT

940

10,627

11,567

1.3%

NM

242

2,753

2,995

0.3%

DC

118

1,442

1,560

0.2%

NV

1,083

19,053

20,136

2.2%

DE

202

2,455

2,657

0.3%

NY

4,414

41,475

45,889

5.1%

FL

7,741

101,728

109,469

12.1%

OH

1,454

17,464

18,918

2.1%

GA

2,199

30,231

32,430

3.6%

OK

167

1,912

2,079

0.2%

HI

274

3,229

3,503

0.4%

OR

735

9,271

10,006

1.1%

IA

134

2,002

2,136

0.2%

PA

1,533

16,906

18,439

2.0%

ID

196

3,189

3,385

0.4%

RI

291

4,053

4,344

0.5%

IL

3,111

43,777

46,888

5.2%

SC

585

7,572

8,157

0.9%

IN

571

7,780

8,351

0.9%

SD

26

296

322

0.0%

KS

164

1,944

2,108

0.2%

TN

705

8,304

9,009

1.0%

KY

269

3,021

3,290

0.4%

TX

2,013

22,290

24,303

2.7%

LA

406

4,606

5,012

0.6%

UT

382

7,666

8,048

0.9%

MA

1,776

20,082

21,858

2.4%

VA

1,429

19,890

21,319

2.4%

MD

1,963

26,546

28,509

3.2%

VT

67

705

772

0.1%

ME

197

2,310

2,507

0.3%

WA

1,392

17,541

18,933

2.1%

MI

1,425

25,591

27,016

3.0%

WI

615

7,851

8,466

0.9%

MN

775

13,381

14,156

1.6%

WV

80

1,120

1,200

0.1%

MO

699

8,155

8,854

1.0%

WY

29

405

434

0.0%

MS

228

2,856

3,084

0.3%

Other2

129

3,065

3,194

0.4%

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: 3rd 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 October 2012

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Volume

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity
Total MSA % of U.S.
HAMP
HAMP
Activity
Activity

Active
Trials

Active Permanent
Modifications

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana,
CA

4,836

68,078

72,914

8.1%

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA

5,426

55,345

60,771

6.7%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano
Beach, FL

3,498

44,389

47,887

5.3%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI
MSA

2,994

42,532

45,526

5.0%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario,
CA

2,323

42,638

44,961

5.0%

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

1,842

28,271

30,113

3.3%

1,117

27,007

28,124

3.1%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA

1,746

24,459

26,205

2.9%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA

1,406

18,888

20,294

2.2%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA

1,021

15,817

16,838

1.9%

888

15,617

16,505

1.8%

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1

8,820,907

864

15,494

16,358

1.8%

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov
(October 2012)

1,993,497

1,029

15,018

16,047

1.8%

1,240

14,473

15,713

1.7%

888

14,286

15,174

1.7%

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville,
CA

Program to
Date

October

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

3,454,706

64,356

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

1,665,646

32,957

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

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

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative)

78

69,288

159,890,203

1

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

Note: Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

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

9

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

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer

Estimated
Eligible 60+ Day
Delinquent
Borrowers1

Trial Plan
Offers
Extended2

All HAMP
Trials
Started3

All HAMP
Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Active Trial
Modifications3

Active Trial
Modifications
Lasting 6 Months
or Longer4

Active
Permanent
Modifications3

Bank of America, N.A.

118,726

552,599

347,813

164,507

12,375

5,615

119,529

CitiMortgage, Inc.

29,776

211,962

140,857

66,472

2,988

885

52,459

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

25,141

111,269

75,123

57,405

2,265

21

42,595

Homeward Residential, Inc.

27,582

54,633

50,196

41,559

2,407

203

31,207

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

86,402

412,026

325,214

180,838

11,266

506

139,713

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

73,525

108,993

159,799

97,721

6,611

918

68,445

OneWest Bank

19,315

96,702

64,874

42,824

1,635

147

35,006

Select Portfolio Servicing

23,568

74,409

60,051

34,929

1,130

256

24,986

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

89,128

243,464

278,748

150,772

10,946

1,377

119,236

Other Servicers

227,319

285,278

438,353

269,572

10,305

1,262

207,659

Total

720,482

2,151,335

1,941,028

1,106,599

61,928

11,190

840,835

Servicer

1 Estimated

eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers based on survey
information as submitted by servicers as of September 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
October 31, 2012. Servicers began accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification
requests as of June 1, 2012 and some servicers have begun to include trial
plans offered under the HAMP Tier 2 eligibility requirements. The reduction
is due to Wells Fargo, N.A. restating the number of trial plan offers
extended from the previous month.

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

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.

10

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through October 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

Transactions
Started5

Transactions
Completed

Bank of America, N.A.

347,813

164,507

13,786

11,448

33,044

26,405

25,308

CitiMortgage, Inc.

140,857

66,472

2,385

1,923

12,248

803

528

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

75,123

57,405

2,876

2,030

4,404

4,285

3,005

Homeward Residential, Inc.

50,196

41,559

0

0

N/A

1,373

739

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

325,214

180,838

26,599

20,680

27,728

39,360

27,623

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

159,799

97,721

26,320

19,332

N/A

3,235

1,564

OneWest Bank

64,874

42,824

5,898

5,088

3,132

4,464

2,446

Select Portfolio Servicing

60,051

34,929

2,291

2,048

N/A

3,109

2,463

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

278,748

150,772

20,999

16,694

14,504

17,740

11,460

Other Servicers

438,353

269,572

3,037

2,466

4,097

6,343

5,127

1,941,028

1,106,599

104,191

81,709

99,157

107,117

80,263

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.

11

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

Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, October 2011 – September 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%
91%

92%

97%

94%
89%

90%

89%
84%

80%
71%
70%
60%

55%

50%
89%

40%

89%

87%

78%

76%

75%
68%

64%

30%
20%

31%

10%
0%

Bank of America CitiMortgage

GMAC

Homeward
Residential

Right Party Contact Ratio2

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

1 Homeowners

with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before 1/1/2009; 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 are including 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 September 30, 2012.

12

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through October 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.

300
Maximum servicer incentive is paid for
converting a permanent modification
that was 120 days delinquent or less at
trial start.

250

Days

200

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.

13

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through October 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, 44% have converted to permanent modification.
Average Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10
87% Converted to Permanent Modification
3% Pending Processing or Decision
100%

87%

90%
86%

84%

90%
83%

81%

80%

Conversion Rate

91%

89%

60%

40%

20%

0%
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

Homeward
Residential

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

1

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. However, trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current
servicer's population. A servicer's conversion rate can be negatively impacted by the transfer of trial modifications.

14

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through October 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. Over the last two quarters, all of the nine
largest servicers’ non-GSE resolved cases have an average resolution time below the 30 day target.
Q1 2012

Q2 2012

Q3 2012

Current Quarter

Target: 30 Calendar Days2
40
35
30

Days

25
20
15
10
5
0
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

Homeward
Residential

Bank of
America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

6,725

987

8,147

711

Total

14,872

Total

175

GSE Cases
Resolved Cases3 Non-GSE Cases
Active Cases

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

Homeward
Residential

JPMorgan
Chase

404

45

613

1,141

1,698

1,017

26

10

OneWest

Ocwen

OneWest

2,156

229

3,407

1,856

1,186

5,563

28

90

SPS

Wells Fargo

SPS

Wells Fargo

522

8

1,707

721

286

3,403

2,085

1,243

294

5,110

17

10

7

113

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 October 31, 2012 and exclude those that did not require servicer actions.
Source: MHA Support Centers.

15

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

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

Servicer

Action Not
Allowed –
Action Bankruptcy Borrower
Pending1 in Process Current

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

Bank of America, N.A.

5,899

5,052

14,578

64,666

1,501

6,598

21,954

16,505

31,505

168,258

CitiMortgage Inc.

1,755

6,402

6,707

26,874

1,903

3,359

6,194

4,085

11,479

68,758

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

327

306

1,069

6,974

14

715

1,467

1,579

2,456

14,907

Homeward Residential,
Inc.

196

117

495

2,706

85

613

446

753

179

5,590

JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A.

4,178

3,489

21,205

40,633

1,379

2,304

14,866

13,342

14,335

115,731

Ocwen Loan Services, LLC

2,557

2,214

2,982

24,088

3,491

758

1,216

6,746

4,788

48,840

OneWest Bank

152

249

467

12,170

44

113

1,269

1,478

4,400

20,342

Select Portfolio Servicing

706

235

964

4,853

218

315

1,329

661

3,400

12,681

1,180

4,575

9,353

40,929

684

8,235

8,530

15,596

26,894

115,976

16,950

22,639

57,820

223,893

9,319

23,010

57,271

60,745

99,436

571,083

3.0%

4.0%

10.1%

39.2%

1.6%

4.0%

10.0%

10.6%

17.4%

100%

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
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 September 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.

16

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

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

Servicer

Action
Pending1

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy Borrower
in Process Current

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

Bank of America, N.A.

19,086

14,370

80,941

143,771

7,677

22,364

46,636

45,992

58,364

439,201

CitiMortgage Inc.

10,152

16,642

23,631

61,979

8,487

6,438

21,438

14,393

24,249

187,409

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

7,036

4,470

38,285

51,840

731

11,206

14,818

14,399

18,909

161,694

Homeward Residential,
Inc.

2,441

1,962

17,010

45,448

1,554

5,712

4,062

9,417

2,214

89,820

JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A.

20,189

16,511

138,078

142,824

8,512

63,516

68,332

51,458

37,399

546,819

Ocwen Loan Services, LLC

12,853

6,901

25,769

109,782

10,506

5,320

5,898

18,425

15,001

210,455

OneWest Bank

3,690

2,437

31,095

43,064

916

4,120

7,029

9,189

13,331

114,871

Select Portfolio Servicing

2,319

441

3,075

6,831

355

461

2,517

1,393

2,953

20,345

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

14,638

9,897

57,847

46,250

1,443

18,906

33,316

28,701

34,191

245,189

92,404

73,631

415,731

651,789

40,181

138,043

204,046

193,367

206,611

2,015,803

4.6%

3.7%

20.6%

32.3%

2.0%

6.8%

10.1%

9.6%

10.2%

100.0%

TOTAL
(These Largest
Servicers)

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

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through September 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.

17

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

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

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

18

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

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

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

The Determination Process: Results of the Data
Treasury reviews the compliance data and ratings, the program results metrics,
and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not
limited to, a servicer’s progress in implementing previously identified
improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial
improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its
performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the
significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments,
Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 20 summarizes the
overall level of improvement needed for each servicer.

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

Additional Information
See the “Metrics Description” on page 43 for a description of each of the
compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more
information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov.

19

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

3rd 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, N.A.
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Homeward Residential, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
OneWest Bank
Select Portfolio Servicing

For the third quarter of 2012, OneWest Bank and Select Portfolio Servicing were determined to need minor improvement in their performance under MHA
guidelines.
CitiMortgage, Inc. was determined to need moderate improvement and their compliance results for the third quarter approached the level required for a
determination of minor improvement.
Bank of America, N.A., GMAC Mortgage, LLC, Homeward Residential, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. were
also found to need moderate improvement.

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

20

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 4th Quarter 20101-3rd 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

1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

*Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.

1Q12

2Q12

3Q12

21

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 4th Quarter 2010-3rd 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

*Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.

2Q 2012

3Q 2012

22

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 4th Quarter 2010-3rd 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

*Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.

2Q12

3Q12

23

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: 4th Quarter 2010 – 3rd Quarter 2012
Second Look % Disagree1

Servicer
Bank of America,
N.A.
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage,
LLC
Homeward
Residential, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A.
Litton Loan
Servicing, LP4
Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC
OneWest Bank
Select Portfolio
Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A.8

Second Look % Unable to Determine2

Income Calculation Error Rate3

Q4
2010

Q1
2011

Q2
2011

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
Q2
2012 2012

Q3
2012

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

Q4
2010

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
2012

Q2
2012

Q3
2012

2.4%

1.5%

0.8%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

1.2%

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

22.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0%

6.0%

5.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

2.0%

0.5%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

12.3% 13.3% 5.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 3.8%

8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 6.0%

3.0%

4.0%

1.0%

3.1%

4.0%

4.7%

1.7%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

1.3%

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

29.0% 6.0%

4.2%

4.2%

6.5%

4.0%

6.0% 10.0%

5.3%

1.0%

0.7%

0.0%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

29.3% 5.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.5% 1.3%

30.0% 14.0% 5.3%

2.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

4.0%

3.9%

1.6%

1.2%

0.0%

0.7%

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

16.0% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7% 1.4%

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

0.0%

2.0%

6.0%

3.7%

3.3%

1.0%

N/A

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%

0.0%

4.7%

6.7%

0.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

2.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1.2%

0.4%

0.4%

0.0%

0.3%

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Q1
2011

6.0%

Q2
2011

2.0%

1.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

24.7% 10.3% 3.0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3%

18.0% 33.0% 2.0%

2.0%

2.0%

3.0%

3.0%

0.0%

0.0%

12.3% 3.7% 1.0% 0.0% 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%

0.0%

17.0% 2.3% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.7%

22.0% 15.0% 10.0% 3.2%

1.0%

3.0%

2.0%

3.0%

1.0%

1.3%

6.8% 6.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 1.0%

27.0% 27.0% 4.4%

4.0%

2.0%

0.0%

1.0%

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 %

24

MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, N.A.
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

v

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

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

3.0%





-



< 5%

0.3%





-



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

n



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

w

1.2%

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

n

< 4%

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

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

v Bank of America, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

v After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, N.A. servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

25

MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, N.A.
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

56.3%

Bank of
America, N.A.

39.7%
35.7%
56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

27
26
24

10

70%

20

30

75%

June 2012
Sep. 2012

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
1.3%
1.2%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Mar. 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, N.A.

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

83.5%
83.7%
83.0%

Bank of
America, N.A.

Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, N.A.

0

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

26

MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

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.

n

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.

n

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

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed
Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

< 10%

3.8%





-



< 5%

3.1%





-



< 5%

0.5%





-



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

n



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

w

2.0%

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

n

< 4%

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

v

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results
v CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement due to
needed progress in implementing previously indentified improvements.
v After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer
incentives will not be withheld at this time.

27

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:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

37.2%
CitiMortgage, Inc.

56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

26
24
24

0

10

70%

20

30

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Sep. 2012

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

CitiMortgage, Inc.

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

June 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

84.3%
85.1%
86.5%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

29.4%
26.6%

Mar. 2012

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

28

MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

v

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

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

10.0%





-



< 5%

3.3%





-



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

n



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

w

1.3%

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

n

< 4%

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

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

v GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

v After considering all relevant factors, GMAC Mortgage, LLC servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

29

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

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.8%
2.9%
2.1%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

12
12
13

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%
84.1%
83.7%
85.5%

June 2012
Sep. 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Mar. 2012

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

30

MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential, Inc.
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

v

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

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

1.3%





-



< 5%

4.0%





-



< 5%

0.7%





-



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

n



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

w

0.0%

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

n

< 4%

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

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

v Homeward Residential, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

v After considering all relevant factors, Homeward Residential, Inc. servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

31

MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential, 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:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Mar. 2012
June 2012

7.5%
6.2%
10.1%

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

32
31
29

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

0

10

70%

20

30

80%

85%

90%

95%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.8%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

75%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Sep. 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

89.1%
89.3%
89.4%

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

32

MHA Servicer Assessment: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

v

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

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

1.4%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 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

n



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

w

0.1%

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

n

< 4%

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

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

v After considering all relevant factors, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

33

MHA Servicer Assessment: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

10.2%
10.4%
5.2%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

56.3%
39.7%
35.7%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

70%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

0.2%
0.1%
0.2%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20

30

40

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

34
33
32

10

June 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

0

Mar. 2012
Sep. 2012

85.8%
86.9%
87.7%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

1.7%
11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

34

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

v

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

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

1.3%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



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

n



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

w

0.0%

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

n

< 4%

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

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

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

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

v 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.

35

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:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

17.1%
14.0%
12.3%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

70%

34
33
32

10

20

30

80%

85%

June 2012
Sep. 2012

90%

95%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

0.5%
11.2%
1.0%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

75%

Mar. 2012

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Best
Servicer
Performance

10
9
9

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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 transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the June 2012 reporting period increased as the result
of approximately 6,550 transferred loans. In addition, the transfer of loans resulted in a decrease in the conversion rate and an increase in the aged trials as a percentage of active trials.

36

MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

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

v

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.

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



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

n

0.0%

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

w

< 4%

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

n

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results
v OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

37

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:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

4.1%
3.0%
6.7%

OneWest Bank

56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

16
15
14

OneWest Bank

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

Best
Servicer
Performance

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

OneWest Bank

88.7%
88.7%
90.3%

June 2012
Sep. 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

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%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Mar. 2012

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

38

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

v

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

n

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.

n

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

< 10%

0.7%





-



< 5%

3.0%





-



< 5%

0.3%





-



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

n



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

w

0.0%

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

n

< 4%

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

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results
v Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

39

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing1
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

6.8%
2.3%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

56.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

39.7%
35.7%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

70%

75%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

7
7
6

Select Portfolio
Servicing

0.2%
0.1%

0

10

20

30

85%

90%

95%

22.8%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

80%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

7
7
6

34
33
32

June 2012

82.9%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Mar. 2012
Sep. 2012

89.2%
89.4%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

16.1%

0%

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.
1Select Portfolio Servicing received transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the September 2012 reporting period increased as the
result of approximately 5,540 transferred loans. In addition, the transfer of loans resulted in a decrease in the conversion rate and an increase in the aged trials as a percentage of active trials.

40

MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Compliance Results

Overview
v

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

v

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

v

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

Third Quarter 2012
Performance Category

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric
n

n

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.

n

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.

n

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



< 10%

1.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 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

n



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

w

1.3%

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

n

< 4%

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

v

Rating

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

n

Servicer Result

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.

Benchmark

Q3 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

v Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

v After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. servicer

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

incentives will not be withheld at this time.

41

MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
0.8%
2.3%
2.1%

Best
Servicer
Performance

12.2%
8.0%
11.0%

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

56.3%
39.7%
35.7%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

7
7
6

Best
Servicer
Performance

25
24
25

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

34
33
32

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

20

30

June 2012

81.5%
79.6%
79.9%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
1.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Mar. 2012
Sep. 2012

89.5%
89.7%
89.3%

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

89.5%
89.7%
90.3%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11.2%
22.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

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.

42

MHA Servicer Assessment
Appendix
Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury pays incentives
to servicers, investors, and homeowners for permanent
modifications completed under MHA. Although
Compliance Metrics (quantitative)
intended for different recipients, all incentives are paid
Second Look % Disagree: Second Look is a process in
through the servicer. Data that servicers upload to the
which MHA-C reviews loans not in a permanent
program system of record is used to calculate the
modification, to assess the accuracy of the servicer’s
incentives paid to servicers, investors, and homeowners.
determination of whether the homeowner is eligible for This metric measures how data anomalies between
a modification. This metric measures the percentage of servicer loan files and the reported information affect
loans reviewed in Second Look with which MHA-C
incentive payments. For Incentive Payment Data Error
disagrees with a servicer’s determination.
results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to
take include, but are not limited to: correcting the
Second Look % Unable to Determine: This metric
identified errors and correcting system and operational
measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second
processes such that accurate data is mapped to its
Look for which MHA-C is not able to determine, based
appropriate places in the program system of record.
on the documentation provided, how the servicer
reached its loan-modification decision.
Compliance Metrics (qualitative)
For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to Determine
Servicers establish processes and internal controls to
results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to
help ensure their compliance with Program guidance.
take include, but are not limited to: reevaluating loans
For each of the performance categories, Treasury
not offered HAMP modifications, submitting additional
performs a qualitative assessment of those internal
documentation to support the initial reason for denial of
controls based on MHA-C’s compliance reviews. That
the modification, clarifying loan status, and engaging in
assessment evaluates the nature, scope, and potential or
systemic process remediation. For such results, servicers
actual impact on homeowners resulting from instances
are also reminded of their obligation to suspend
of servicer non-compliance with its own internal
foreclosure of the loan until the unresolved items are
controls. For ineffective internal controls, remedial
remediated.
actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but
are not limited to: identifying and reevaluating any
Income Calculation Errors: Correctly calculating
homeowner monthly income is a critical component of affected loans, enhancing the effectiveness of internal
evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an controls, and conducting staff training on servicer
procedures.
accurate modification payment. This metric measures
how often MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s calculation
Program Metrics
of a borrower’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up
to a 5% differential from MHA-C’s calculations. For
Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the rate
Income Calculation Error results, remedial actions
of conversion to permanent modification for trials
Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not
started on or after June 1, 2010, when all servicers were
limited to: correcting income errors exceeding the 5%
required to verify income documentation at trial start.
differential, requiring the servicer to review their own
Conversion rate is measured against all trials eligible to
income calculation accuracy, enhancing policies and
convert – those three months in trial, or four months if
procedures, and conducting staff training on income
the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial
calculation.
modification start.

Metrics Descriptions

Permanent modifications transferred among servicers
are credited to the originating servicer. However, trial
modifications transferred are reflected in the current
servicer's population. A servicer's conversion rate can be
negatively impacted by the transfer of trial
modifications.
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.

43

Making Home Affordable
Program Performance Report Through October 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, N.A.1
Bank United
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC
CCO Mortgage
Central Florida Educators Federal
Credit Union
CitiMortgage, Inc.
Citizens 1st National Bank
Community Bank & Trust Company
CUC Mortgage Corporation
DuPage Credit Union
Fay Servicing, LLC
Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank
First Bank
First Financial Bank, N.A.
Franklin Credit Management
Corporation
Franklin Savings
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 Residential, Inc.2
Horicon Bank
IC Federal Credit Union
Idaho Housing and Finance Association
iServe Residential Lending LLC
iServe Servicing Inc.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3
Lake City 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
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
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, N.A.6
Yadkin Valley Bank

1

Bank of America, N.A. 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, N.A. 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, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

44

Making Home Affordable
Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs
Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)
Bank of America, N.A.1
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Green Tree Servicing LLC
iServe Residential Lending, LLC
iServe Servicing, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2
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, N.A. 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, N.A.1
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, N.A.2
M&T Bank
Marix Servicing, LLC
Marsh Associates, Inc.
Midland Mortgage Company
Nationstar Mortgage ,LLC
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 5
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, N.A.4
Weststar Mortgage, Inc.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC
Green Tree Servicing, LLC
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage 3
Residential Credit Solutions
Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.
Select Portfolio Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4

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

FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP)
Bank of America, N.A.1
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
CitiMortgage, Inc.
Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation

1

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

45