Full text of HAMP Performance Summary : Making Home Affordable Program : Program Performance Report, Through April 2013

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 April 2013

Report Highlights

Inside:

Over 1.6 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through Making Home Affordable

SUMMARY RESULTS:

• Nearly 1.2 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 $547 each month – more than one-third of their median
before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $19.7 billion to date in monthly mortgage
payments.

2
Making Home Affordable Program Activity
3
First Lien Modification Activity
Activity for HAFA, 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP 4
and UP
Principal Reduction Activity
5-6
First Lien Modification Characteristics
7
HAMP Activity by State
8
HAMP Activity by MSA
9

• Homeowners currently in HAMP permanent modifications with some form of principal reduction
have been granted an estimated $10.2 billion in principal reduction. Of all non-GSE loans eligible for
principal reduction entering HAMP in April, 67% included a principal reduction feature.
• Nearly 111,000 second lien modifications have been completed through the Second Lien
Modification Program (2MP).
• Approximately 154,000 homeowners have exited their homes through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of
foreclosure with assistance from the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA).

This Month: Q1 2013 Servicer Assessment Results
• For the first quarter of 2013, four servicers were found to need only minor improvement on the
areas reviewed for program performance, while five servicers were found to need moderate
improvement. All servicers will need to continue to demonstrate progress in areas identified in
subsequent 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 Q1
2013, the average income calculation error rate for the top servicers was below 2 percent.
• Servicers are more effectively evaluating homeowners under program eligibility criteria as
evidenced in the “second look disagree” category, which reflects the rate at which Treasury’s
program reviews disagree with the servicer’s decision not to assist a homeowner. In Q1 2013,
the average second look disagree percentage for the top servicers was less than 1 percent.

SERVICER RESULTS:
10
First Lien Modification Activity
11
First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity
12
Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners
13
Average Delinquency at Trial Start
14
Conversion Rate
15
Time to Resolve Escalations/Homeowner
Outreach
Disposition of Homeowners Not in
16-18
HAMP
SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Overview
Servicer Results
Description of Metrics

19-25
26-43
44

APPENDICES:
Note: 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.

Participants in MHA Programs

45-46

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Making Home Affordable Program Activity
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.

In total, the MHA program has completed more than 1.6 million first and second lien permanent modifications, HAFA transactions, and UP forbearance plans.

Program-to-Date

Reported Since Prior
Period

1,326,834

20,715

2MP Modifications Started

110,722

1,409

HAFA Transactions Completed2

153,964

13,530

UP Forbearance Plans Started (through
March 2013)

32,840

686

1,624,360

36,340

MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications
Started1

Cumulative Activity3

MHA Program Activity

Cumulative MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative Transactions Completed

Program
MHA First Lien
Modifications

The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) provides
eligible borrowers the opportunity to lower their first lien
mortgage payment to affordable and sustainable levels through a
uniform loan modification process. Effective June 2012, HAMP's
eligibility requirements were expanded to include a "Tier 2"
evaluation for non-GSE loans that is modeled after the GSE
Standard Modification and includes properties that are currently
occupied by a tenant as well as vacant properties the borrower
intends to rent. FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP provide first lien
modifications for distressed borrowers in loans guaranteed
through the Federal Housing Administration and Rural Housing
Service.

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. Effective November
2012, the GSEs jointly streamlined their short sale and deed-in-lieu
of foreclosure programs. The GSE Standard HAFA program is
closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program.

Unemployment Program
(UP)

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

1,800
1,600
1,434

1,400
1,200

1,137

1,162

1,191

1,219

1,244

1,277

1,299

1,475

1,515

1,550

1,588

Purpose

1,624

1,324

1,000
800
Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
2012
2013

Source: HAMP system of record for HAMP, 2MP, HAFA, FHA-HAMP, and RD-HAMP. UP participation is reported via servicer survey
through March 2013. GSE Standard Modification and GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of
April 2013.

1 Includes (a) 1,190,605 GSE and Non-GSE HAMP permanent modifications, (b) 13,792 FHA- and RD-HAMP
modifications, and (c) 122,437 GSE Standard Modifications since October 2011 under the GSEs’ Servicer
Alignment Initiative. The GSEs and other government agencies also undertake other foreclosure prevention
activities beyond their participation in MHA which is not reflected in this report. Per the Federal Housing Finance
Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the Fourth Quarter of 2012, since 4Q 2008 the GSEs have completed
more than 1.3 million permanent modifications and nearly 450,000 short sales and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure
actions, which includes their activity under MHA. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. As
reported in the May 2013 edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing Scorecard, FHA has offered more than
1.8 million loss mitigation and early delinquency interventions through April 30, 2013 since April 1, 2009, which
includes their activity under MHA.
2 Includes the GSE and Non-GSE activity under the MHA program, in addition to the cumulative GSE Standard
HAFA transactions completed since November 2012. Does not include other GSE short sale and deed-in-lieu
activity prior to November 2012 outside the GSE Standard HAFA program.
3 This does not include trial modifications that have cancelled or not yet converted to permanent modifications,
or HAFA transactions started but not yet completed.

2

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

HAMP (First Lien) Modifications

Trial
Modifications

Tier 1

2,017,588

Tier 2

15,741

Trials Reported Since March 2013 Report1

16,703

Trial Modifications Canceled Since June 1, 20102

68,575

Active Trials

67,855

All Permanent Modifications Started

Permanent
Modifications

HAMP Trials Started

2,033,329

1,190,605

Tier 1

1,185,586

Tier 2

5,019

Permanent Modifications Reported Since
March 2013 Report3

11,966

Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)4

306,611

Active Permanent Modifications

870,038

Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time.
774,869 cumulative including 706,294 that had trial start dates prior to June 1, 2010 when Treasury implemented a verified
income requirement.
3 Per program guidance, servicers began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This process requires reverting the impacted
permanent modifications in the HAMP system of record to an active trial with re-boarding of some of these permanent
modifications in subsequent months. As a result, fluctuations are expected in the monthly activity reported in the near term.
4 A permanent modification disqualifies when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Does not include
13,956 loans paid off.

Under the original HAMP program, launched in March 2009, now referred to as “Tier 1,” eligible loans include
conventional loans more than 60 days delinquent (unless the borrower is in imminent default), that originated on
or before January 1, 2009 with a current unpaid principal balance below the maximum conforming loan limit5
and were owner-occupied at origination.
Homeowners who have HAMP-eligible loans may qualify for Tier 1 if they meet additional criteria including, but
not limited to requiring: a debt-to-income ratio greater than 31%, occupancy, employment, and pooling and
servicing agreement eligibility. Based on current estimates, of the 3.8 million homeowners who are currently
60+ days delinquent, an estimated 600,000 homeowners are potentially eligible for HAMP Tier 1.
On January 27, 2012, Treasury announced an expansion of the eligibility for HAMP to reduce additional
foreclosures and help stabilize neighborhoods. The eligibility was expanded for non-GSE loans to (1) allow for
more flexible debt-to-income criteria and (2) include properties that are currently occupied by a tenant, as well
as vacant properties which the borrower intends to rent. This expanded HAMP criteria, referred to as HAMP
“Tier 2,” became effective on June 1, 2012 (although not all servicers began offering Tier 2 modifications on that
date). There is insufficient program data at this time to estimate the number of homeowners who may qualify
for HAMP Tier 2.

5 Current unpaid principal balance must be no greater than: $729,750 for a single-unit property, 2 units: $934,200, 3 Units: $1,129,250, 4
Units: $1,403,400.

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

2,000
1,950
1,900
1,850
1,800
1,750

1,756

1,775

1,790

1,808

1,829

1,847

1,865

1,883

1,898

1,916

1,930

1,947

1,964

1,977

1,989

2,002

2,019

2,033

50

1,700
1,650
1,600

Nov Dec Jan Feb
2011
2012

Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep

Oct Nov Dec

Jan Feb
2013

Mar Apr

0

Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. For example, 16,703 trials have entered the
HAMP system of record since the prior report; 14,797 were trials with a first payment recorded in April 2013.

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)
1,200
All Permanent Modifications Started
(000s)

Estimated Eligible Loans and Borrowers

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

2,050

1
2

100

2,100

New Trials Started (000s)

All Trials Started

Total

All Trials Started (000s)

HAMP Activity Through April 2013

1,100
1,000
910

933

951

974

994

1,009

1,026 1,043

1,060

1,077

1,091

1,107

1,122

1,167
1,136 1,151

1,179 1,191

900
800
700
600

Nov Dec Jan Feb
2011
2012

Source: HAMP system of record.

Mar

Apr

May June July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan Feb
2013

Mar

Apr

3

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

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.

The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA) offers incentives and a streamlined
process 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. Effective November 2012, the GSEs revised their short sale and deed-in-lieu
programs. The GSE Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program. In
HAFA transactions, homeowners:

2MP modifications and partial extinguishments require that the first lien HAMP modification be
permanent and active and that the second lien have an unpaid balance of $5,000 or more and a
monthly payment of at least $100.
All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1

110,722

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments

27,804

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2

10,309

Active Second Lien Modifications3

72,609

Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments

7,816

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

• Follow a streamlined process for short sales and deed-in-lieu transactions that requires no
verification of income (unless as required by investors) and allows for pre-approved short sale
terms;
• Receive a waiver of deficiency once the transaction is completed that releases the
homeowner from remaining mortgage debt;
• Receive at least $3,000 in relocation assistance at closing.

Short Sale

Median Amount of Full Extinguishment

$61,285

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second Lien Modifications

$9,666

Includes second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for April
2013 data, though the effective date may occur in May 2013. Number of modifications is net of
cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
2 Includes 2,905 loans paid off.
3 Includes 5,813 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.
1

Deed-in-Lieu
Total Transactions Completed

Non-GSE Activity

GSE Activity1

Total

108,335

42,207

150,542

3,140

282

3,422

111,475

42,489

153,964

1 Includes GSE activity under the MHA program in addition to the GSE Standard HAFA program implemented in
November 2012. GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of April 2013. Does not
include other GSE short sale and deed-in-lieu activity outside the HAFA program. Per the Federal Housing
Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the Fourth Quarter of 2012, since 4Q 2008 the GSEs have
completed nearly 450,000 short sales and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure actions, which includes their activity
under MHA. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report.

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity

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.

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

All UP Forbearance Plans Started

32,840

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started

25,291

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required

28,082

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started

13,764

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required

4,758

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through March 31, 2013.

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

4

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

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

127,919

41,893

169,812

Trials Reported Since March 2013
Report

4,176

1,350

5,526

Active Trial Modifications

15,029

4,152

19,181

All Permanent Modifications Started

102,456

34,478

136,934

Permanent Modifications Reported
Since March 2013 Report

3,239

1,065

4,304

Active Permanent Modifications

87,700

30,011

117,711

Median Principal Amount Reduced for
Active Permanent Modifications2

$73,370

$56,512

$67,644

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

32.1%

18.0%

29.5%

$8,138,152,198

$2,048,408,399

$10,186,560,597

Total Outstanding Principal Balance
Reduced on Active Permanent
Modifications 2

Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA.
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.

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
with Principal
All HAMP
Modifications4 Reduction
Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:
- At least 60 days delinquent
80%
84%
- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default
20%
16%
Top three States by Activity5, Percent of Total Activity:
- California
- Florida
- Illinois
Top Three States’ Percent of Total

35%
15%
5%
56%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio:
- Before Modification
119%
- After Modification6
117%

152%
115%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio:
- Front-End DTI
45.5%
46.2%
- Back-End DTI
70.3%
60.5%

1
2

26%
12%
5%
43%

Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without principal reduction.
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-ofpocket 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-tovalue ratio can increase in the modification process.

4

5

5

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

HAMP Principal Reduction

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

The terms of the $25 billion National Mortgage Settlement regarding mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five largest mortgage servicers,
the Federal government, and 49 state attorneys general, have caused servicers to increase the use of non-PRA principal reductions. Of non-GSE
loans eligible1 for principal reduction that started a trial in April 2013, 67% included a principal reduction feature. Only 55% 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. Principal reductions granted
outside of the HAMP PRA program since February 2012 are likely attributable to the National Mortgage Settlement.
All Principal Reduction2

PRA

90.0%
80.0%
70.0%

56%

60.0%

44%

50.0%
40.0%

37%

43%

59% 60% 60%

71%

61% 61%
54% 54% 55% 53% 55%

58%

81%

77% 78% 78%

62% 62% 61% 61%

72%

70% 71% 69%

67%

56% 56% 55% 55% 55%

46% 46% 46% 45%

36%

30.0%
20.0%

45% 46% 46% 46% 45% 56%

59%

63%
61% 60% 62%

67% 66% 69%

74%

77%

28%

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

Nov

Dec Jan-13 Feb

Mar

Apr

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 April 2013

Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics
Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated to total approximately $19.7 billion, program to date, compared
with unmodified mortgage obligations. The median monthly savings for homeowners in active permanent first lien modifications is $546.81, or 39% of the median monthly payment
before modification.

Modification Steps of Active Permanent Modifications
HAMP modifications follow a series of waterfall steps. The modification steps include
interest rate adjustment, term extension and principal forbearance.
• Under Tier 1, servicers apply the modification steps in sequence until the
homeowner’s after modification front-end debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is 31%. The
impact of each modification step can vary to achieve the target of 31%.
• Under Tier 2, servicers apply consistent modification terms resulting in the
homeowner’s post modification DTI falling within an allowable target range.1

Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications

Tier 1

Tier 2

Interest Rate Reduction

96.6%

73.1%

Term Extension

62.1%

82.1%

32.9%

22.0%

Principal Forbearance

1 Subject to investor restrictions. Effective February 1, 2013, Supplemental Directive 12-09 expands the acceptable DTI range for Tier 2
to 10-55%.

After
Modification

Median
Decrease

Tier 1

45.6%

31.0%

-15.0 pct pts

Tier 2

40.6%

30.7%

-8.2 pct pts

Tier 1

70.4%

52.0%

-15.2 pct pts

Tier 2

55.0%

43.5%

-8.3 pct pts

Tier 1

$1,418.93

$803.69

($548.04)

Tier 2

$1,269.67

$849.75

($366.97)

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio3

Active permanent modifications reflect the following modification steps:
Modification Step

Before
Modification

Loan Characteristic

Median Monthly Housing
Payment4

Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo fees) to monthly gross
income.
3 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. Homeowners who have a back-end debt-to-income ratio of greater than 55% are required to seek housing
counseling under program guidelines.
4 Principal and interest payment. Before modification payment is homeowner’s current payment at time of evaluation.
2

Homeowner Characteristics
• Tier 2 provides another modification opportunity for struggling homeowners who
did not qualify for Tier 1 or received a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification but lost
good standing. Of the Tier 2 trial modifications started:
• 29% were previously in a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification.
• 20% were previously evaluated for Tier 1 and did not meet eligibility
requirements.

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent modifications
are:

• Of the Tier 2 trial modifications started, 8% were for non owner-occupied
properties.

• Of all HAMP 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.

• The median gross monthly income of homeowners in the program is $3,837.38.
• The median credit score of homeowners in the program is 575.

• 68.1% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or unemployment)
• 10.6% reported excessive obligation
• 3.5% reported an illness of the principal borrower

7

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

HAMP Activity by State

State

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

Modification Activity by State

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

AK

31

409

440

0.0%

MT

68

998

1,066

0.1%

AL

469

4,680

5,149

0.5%

NC

1,383

15,352

16,735

1.8%

AR

195

1,822

2,017

0.2%

ND

6

131

137

0.0%

AZ

1,344

33,833

35,177

3.8%

NE

99

1,139

1,238

0.1%

CA

15,427

226,384

241,811

25.8%

NH

302

3,828

4,130

0.4%

CO

847

12,302

13,149

1.4%

NJ

2,594

27,916

30,510

3.3%

CT

1,055

11,063

12,118

1.3%

NM

311

2,883

3,194

0.3%

DC

104

1,536

1,640

0.2%

NV

1,144

18,997

20,141

2.1%

DE

205

2,549

2,754

0.3%

NY

4,545

43,843

48,388

5.2%

FL

8,430

105,458

113,888

12.1%

OH

1,609

17,965

19,574

2.1%

GA

2,415

30,962

33,377

3.6%

OK

HI

253

3,381

3,634

0.4%

OR

IA

171

2,017

2,188

0.2%

PA

ID

213

3,255

3,468

0.4%

RI

IL

3,450

44,874

48,324

5.2%

IN

736

7,991

8,727

KS

205

2,002

KY

294

3,121

LA

481

4,798

252

1,968

2,220

0.2%

787

9,788

10,575

1.1%

1,887

17,582

19,469

2.1%

308

4,155

4,463

0.5%

SC

766

7,721

8,487

0.9%

0.9%

SD

21

297

318

0.0%

2,207

0.2%

TN

847

8,521

9,368

1.0%

3,415

0.4%

TX

2,414

23,318

25,732

2.7%

5,279

0.6%

UT

424

7,716

8,140

0.9%

MA

1,779

20,742

22,521

2.4%

VA

1,564

20,550

22,114

2.4%

MD

2,355

27,292

29,647

3.2%

VT

93

734

827

0.1%

ME

234

2,386

2,620

0.3%

WA

1,522

18,404

19,926

2.1%

MI

1,461

25,819

27,280

2.9%

WI

709

8,043

8,752

0.9%

MN

746

13,614

14,360

1.5%

WV

83

1,137

1,220

0.1%

MO

738

8,342

9,080

1.0%

WY

32

403

435

0.0%

MS

312

2,891

3,203

0.3%

Other2

135

3,126

3,261

0.3%

Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.
2 Includes Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
1

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: 1st Quarter 2013
National Delinquency
Survey, Mortgage
Bankers Association.

60+ Day Delinquency Rate
Below 5.0%
5.0% - 10.0%

1

10.01% - 15.0%
15.01% - 20.0%

20.01%
and higher

8

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

Active Trials

Active Permanent
Modifications

Total MSA HAMP
Activity1

% of U.S. HAMP
Activity

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA

5,451

72,501

77,952

8.3%

$875.94

41%

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA

5,566

58,180

63,746

6.8%

$889.71

43%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL

3,817

46,565

50,382

5.4%

$585.97

45%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI

3,326

43,592

46,918

5.0%

$571.44

44%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA

2,611

43,502

46,113

4.9%

$691.21

40%

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

2,175

29,017

31,192

3.3%

$697.97

38%

971

26,944

27,915

3.0%

$502.26

41%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA

1,856

25,033

26,889

2.9%

$412.20

40%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA

1,469

20,220

21,689

2.3%

$934.24

40%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA

1,130

16,573

17,703

1.9%

$810.71

39%

927

15,498

16,425

1.8%

$573.00

42%

1,060

15,360

16,420

1.8%

$497.96

42%

833

15,554

16,387

1.7%

$417.85

41%

1,221

14,956

16,177

1.7%

$683.84

38%

925

14,671

15,596

1.7%

$654.06

39%

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ

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

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

1 Total

Median $
Median % Payment
Payment Reduction
Reduction2

reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.
% of the median monthly payment before modification for active permanent
modifications.
2 Reflects

9

Making Home Affordable: Summary Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer and Investor Type
Total Active Modifications4

Active Trial
Modifications2

Active Trial
Modifications
Lasting 6
Months or
Longer3

Active
Permanent
Modifications2

GSE

Private

Portfolio

Total

Trial Plan
Offers
Extended1

All HAMP
Trials
Started2

All HAMP
Permanent
Modifications
Started2

Bank of America, N.A.

573,878

329,692

158,652

13,104

6,656

113,524

59,601

55,218

11,809

126,628

CitiMortgage, Inc.

216,379

142,916

69,165

3,263

1,277

52,946

32,874

5,797

17,538

56,209

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 5

95,323

67,780

50,410

2,716

86

35,259

16,596

7,157

14,222

37,975

JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A.

425,876

340,860

196,719

9,917

1,598

147,250

68,512

59,742

28,913

157,167

Ocwen Loan Servicing,
LLC5

178,546

221,130

148,177

10,443

1,619

101,667

14,119

96,703

1,288

112,110

OneWest Bank

99,439

67,362

45,221

1,602

55

35,472

15,325

18,684

3,065

37,074

Select Portfolio
Servicing

80,133

68,524

39,223

3,136

395

25,918

495

24,965

3,594

29,054

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

261,832

293,844

165,141

11,994

2,742

126,729

55,562

24,644

58,517

138,723

Other Servicers

325,311

501,221

317,897

11,680

1,431

231,273

192,613

31,461

18,879

242,953

2,256,717

2,033,329

1,190,605

67,855

15,859

870,038

455,697

324,371

157,825

937,893

Servicer

Total

1 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through April 30, 2013.
2 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.
3 These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to permanent modifications, but not reported as such to
the HAMP system of record. Per program guidance, servicers recently began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This
process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with re-boarding
of some of these permanent modifications in subsequent months. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications,
these modifications are reported as Active Trials. Many of these loans are 6 months or more beyond their first trial
payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trial. As a result, fluctuations over the next few reporting
cycles are expected in this population.
4 Total active modifications reflects active trial and active permanent HAMP modifications.

5 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC..
The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in future reports. Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc.
was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition is reflected in this report.

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

10

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1
HAMP First Lien Modifications

Second Lien
Modification (2MP)

Home Affordable
Foreclosure
Alternatives (HAFA)5

Trials
Started3

Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Trials
Started3

Permanent
Modifications
Started3

Second Lien
Modifications
Started4

Transactions
Completed

329,692

158,652

13,834

11,485

35,400

36,289

142,916

69,165

2,640

2,114

13,662

814

67,780

50,410

4,284

2,997

4,822

4,677

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

340,860

196,719

31,122

26,153

32,044

31,996

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC6

221,130

148,177

35,902

26,795

N/A

4,915

OneWest Bank

67,362

45,221

6,904

5,984

3,586

4,069

Select Portfolio Servicing

68,524

39,223

2,794

2,495

N/A

3,513

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

293,844

165,141

25,197

19,951

16,324

18,049

Other Servicers

501,221

317,897

5,242

4,482

4,884

7,153

2,033,329

1,190,605

127,919

102,456

110,722

111,475

Servicer
Bank of America, N.A.
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Total
1

Principal Reduction Alternative
(PRA)2

6

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.
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. Includes Non-GSE activity under the MHA program only.
Servicer GSE program data not available.
6
Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were
acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in
future reports. Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc. was acquired
by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition is reflected in this report.
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 April 2013

Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, April 2012 – March 2013
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%

94%

90%

98%

94%

91%

89%
81%

80%

77%

76%

70%
60%
50%
40%

94%
81%

83%

30%

69%

72%

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

79%
66%

67%

SPS

Wells Fargo

20%
10%
0%
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

Right Party Contact Ratio2

OneWest

HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

1 Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before Jan. 1, 2009; excludes loans with current unpaid principal balances greater than current conforming loan limits, FHA and VA loans, loans
where investor pooling and servicing agreements preclude modification, and manufactured housing loans with title/chattel issues that exclude them from HAMP. Treasury has expanded HAMP's eligibility criteria to include a "Tier 2" evaluation
designed to provide help for borrowers with a financial hardship whose debt-to-income ratio is below 31 percent, who have properties occupied by a tenant or who have vacant properties that the borrower intends to rent. Servicers began
accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification requests as of 6/1/2012 and 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.

12

Source: Survey of 8 largest participating servicers as of March 31, 2013.

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

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

250

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

Days

200

150

100

50

0
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

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.

1

13

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

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,
88% have converted to permanent modifications 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 modifications.
Average Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10
88% Converted to Permanent Modification
3% Pending Processing or Decision
100%

85%

88%

88%

92%

90%
85%

90%
83%

Conversion Rate

75%

50%

25%

0%
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase

Ocwen

OneWest

SPS

Wells Fargo

Chart depicts conversion rates as measured against trials eligible to convert – those three months in trial, or four months if the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial
modification start. Permanent modifications transferred among servicers are credited to the originating servicer. Trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current servicer’s
population.

1

14

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Select Measures of Homeowners’ Experience with MHA
Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Volume1

Program
to Date

April

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

3,787,284

61,113

Borrowers Referred for Free Housing Counseling Assistance
Through the Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline2

2,081,316

32,454

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures

Program to Date

Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by Treasury and Partners (cumulative)

84

Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events (cumulative)

1 Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records.
2 Reflects updates made to include additional call types referred for free housing counseling
3 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.

73,454

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)3

9,285,241

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (April 2013)

2,442,970

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative)

172,411,291

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 four quarters, 7 of the 8 largest
servicers’ non-GSE resolved cases have an average resolution time at or below the 30 day target.
Q3 2012
Q4 2012
Q1 2013
Current Quarter
Target: 30 Calendar Days2
40
35
30

Days

25
20
15
10
5
0
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

JPMorgan Chase
GMAC

Ocwen

JPMorgan Chase

OneWest

SPS

Ocwen

OneWest

Wells Fargo
SPS

Wells Fargo

GSE Cases

7,022

1,082

435

2,377

332

573

9

1,865

Resolved Cases3

Non-GSE Cases

8,856

787

693

3,672

3,433

813

371

3,908

Active Cases

Total
Total

15,878
106

1,869
6

1,128
0

6,049
53

3,765
23

1,386
14

380
8

5,773
41

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 April 30, 2013 and exclude those that did not require servicer actions.
Source: MHA Support Centers.

15

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Disposition Path
Homeowners in Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications
Survey Data Through March 2013 (Largest Servicers)
•

HAMP guidance requires that a servicer work with a delinquent homeowner in a permanent modification to cure the delinquency.

•

In the event the homeowner cannot bring a delinquent HAMP modification current without additional assistance, the servicer is prevented from commencing foreclosure proceedings until the
borrower is evaluated for any other loss mitigation action, including other types of modifications or short sales.

•

The majority of homeowners who fall out of HAMP receive an alternative to foreclosure, including but not limited to HAMP Tier 2, an unemployment forbearance, assistance through the
Hardest Hit Fund, an alternative modification, or a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

•

Less than a third of homeowners who have disqualified from HAMP have been referred to foreclosure.

Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Permanent Modification Disqualified:

Action
Pending1

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy in
Process

Borrower
Became
Current

Bank of America, N.A.

5,421

2,131

3,886

10,017

CitiMortgage Inc.

1,754

2,033

1,298

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

2,082

651

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

6,155

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Alternative
Modification Payment Plan2

Loan Payoff

Short Sale/
Deed-in-Lieu

Foreclosure
Starts

Foreclosure
Completions

Total

2,121

442

7,424

4,834

6,141

42,417

2,411

586

104

1,782

1,115

1,860

12,943

1,119

2,126

237

116

2,062

1,957

2,480

12,830

2,183

3,793

13,183

1,600

221

7,065

8,220

3,492

45,912

5,636

1,638

2,311

20,205

4,038

186

921

5,055

1,262

41,252

OneWest Bank

1,010

588

994

1,123

1,017

27

1,315

1,812

1,386

9,272

Select Portfolio Servicing

2,817

567

639

3,303

731

32

1,409

1,359

1,428

12,285

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

2,312

2,712

1,042

14,695

1,285

527

3,151

1,838

5,949

33,511

27,187

12,503

15,082

67,063

11,615

1,655

25,129

26,190

23,998

210,422

12.9%

5.9%

7.2%

31.9%

5.5%

0.8%

11.9%

12.4%

11.4%

100.0%

Servicer

TOTAL
(These Largest Servicers)

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through March 31, 2013. This data reflects the status of homeowners as of March 31, 2013; a homeowner's status may change over time.
Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record.
1 Permanent modifications that have been disqualified, 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 disqualifications pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios.

16

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Disposition Path
Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through March 2013 (Largest Servicers)
Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled:

Servicer

Action
Pending1

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy in
Borrower
Process Became Current

Alternative
Modification

Payment
Plan2

Loan Payoff

Short Sale/
Deed-in-Lieu

Foreclosure
Starts

Foreclosure
Completions

Total

Bank of America, N.A.

4,968

3,183

10,952

50,187

973

8,410

22,807

10,146

38,972

150,598

CitiMortgage Inc.

2,877

7,033

6,541

23,309

1,483

3,155

6,311

3,228

12,225

66,162

212

158

690

6,472

13

851

1,549

1,133

2,630

13,708

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

3,914

3,214

21,869

36,222

1,396

3,779

16,067

9,903

20,158

116,522

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

2,549

1,936

2,645

27,129

2,770

1,024

1,777

5,922

5,444

51,196

682

621

604

6,346

593

209

2,269

3,019

6,069

20,412

2,783

509

1,966

8,408

346

396

2,407

2,062

5,362

24,239

898

4,652

8,553

44,825

225

11,108

7,750

8,061

29,350

115,422

18,883

21,306

53,820

202,898

7,799

28,932

60,937

43,474

120,210

558,259

3.4%

3.8%

9.6%

36.3%

1.4%

5.2%

10.9%

7.8%

21.5%

100%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

OneWest Bank
Select Portfolio Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
TOTAL
(These Largest Servicers)

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through March 31, 2013. This data reflects the status of homeowners as of March 31, 2013; a homeowner's status may change over time.
Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record.
1 Trial loans that have been canceled, but no further action has yet been taken.
2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification.
Note: Excludes cancellations pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios.
See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs.

17

Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results
Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Disposition Path
Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications
Survey Data Through March 2013 (Largest Servicers)
Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification:

Servicer

Action
Pending1

Action Not
Allowed –
Bankruptcy in
Borrower
Process Became Current

Alternative
Modification

Payment
Plan2

Loan Payoff

Short Sale/
Deed-in-Lieu

Foreclosure
Starts

Foreclosure
Completions

Total

Bank of America, N.A.

13,672

10,554

67,369

110,247

4,040

33,051

49,352

28,025

73,299

389,609

CitiMortgage Inc.

8,749

19,967

27,942

45,879

6,450

6,112

20,087

11,414

27,604

174,204

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

5,681

2,887

31,326

48,118

864

15,431

16,928

11,375

20,979

153,589

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

19,874

16,082

140,132

152,176

8,292

78,908

77,806

44,061

53,858

591,189

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

9,786

6,312

27,297

133,146

11,482

7,467

9,193

18,043

17,301

240,027

OneWest Bank

4,552

3,385

36,201

29,855

5,183

7,171

10,197

11,166

18,223

125,933

Select Portfolio Servicing

9,985

833

6,876

4,958

349

661

3,624

4,421

3,747

35,454

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

11,160

12,592

60,392

59,959

1,238

29,126

33,873

26,093

41,144

275,577

83,459

72,612

397,535

584,338

37,898

177,927

221,060

154,598

256,155

1,985,582

4.2%

3.7%

20.0%

29.4%

1.9%

9.0%

11.1%

7.8%

12.9%

100.0%

TOTAL
(These Largest Servicers)

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through March 31, 2013. This data reflects the status of homeowners as of March 31, 2013; a homeowner's status may change over time.
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.

18

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

Background
Since the Making Home Affordable Program’s (MHA) inception in the spring
of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage
servicers. Treasury has been publicly reporting information about servicer
performance through two types of data: compliance data, which reflects
servicer compliance with specific MHA guidelines; and program results data,
which reflects how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible
homeowners and report program activity.
When MHA began, most servicers did not have the staff, procedures, or
systems in place to respond to the volume of homeowners struggling to pay
their mortgages, or to respond to the housing crisis generally. Very few
mortgage modifications were even occurring. Treasury sought to get
servicers to join MHA and to improve their operations quickly, so as to
implement a national mortgage modification program.
Through ongoing compliance reviews, Treasury has required participating
servicers to take specific actions to improve their servicing processes. While
the servicers have improved their performance, they still have more progress
to make. Toward that end, Treasury is publishing servicer assessments for
the largest servicers participating in MHA. 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)

19

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

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

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

The Determination Process: Results of the Data
Treasury reviews the compliance data and ratings, the program results metrics,
and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not
limited to, a servicer’s progress in implementing previously identified
improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial
improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its
performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the
significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments,
Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 21 summarizes the
overall level of improvement needed for each servicer.

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

Additional Information
See the “Metrics Description” on page 44 for a description of each of the
compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more
information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov.

20

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

1st Quarter 2013 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

CitiMortgage, Inc.
Homeward Residential, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Minor

Bank of America, N.A.
GMAC Mortgage, LLC
OneWest Bank
Select Portfolio Servicing

For the first quarter of 2013, Bank of America, N.A, GMAC Mortgage, OneWest Bank and Select Portfolio Servicing were determined to need minor improvement
in their performance under MHA guidelines.
CitiMortgage, Inc. and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC were determined to need moderate improvement and their compliance results for the first quarter approached
the level required for a determination of minor improvement.
Homeward Residential, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 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 First Quarter 2013 servicer assessment results.

21

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 1st Quarter 2011-1st Quarter 2013
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 first published assessments through the most recent assessment.

Bank of America

CitiMortgage

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%
1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

1Q12

2Q12

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

3Q12

4Q12

1Q13

22

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 1st Quarter 2011-1st Quarter 2013
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 first published assessments through the most
recent assessment.
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

GMAC

Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase

Litton*

Ocwen

One West

Select Porfolio Servicing

Wells Fargo

Average

30%

25%

20%

Benchmark: 10%

15%

10%

5%

0%
1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

1Q12

2Q12

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

3Q12

4Q12

1Q13

23

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 1st Quarter 2011-1st Quarter 2013
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 first published assessments through the most recent
assessment.
Bank of America

CitiMortgage

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%
1Q11

2Q11

3Q11

4Q11

1Q12

2Q12

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

3Q12

4Q12

1Q13

24

MHA Servicer Assessment
Overview

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: 1st Quarter 2011–1st Quarter 2013

Second Look % Disagree1

Second Look % Unable to Determine2

Income Calculation Error Rate3

Q1
2011

Q2
2011

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
2012

Q2
2012

Q3
2012

Q4
2012

Q1
2013

Q1
2011

Q2
2011

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
2012

Q2
2012

Q3
2012

Q4
2012

Q1
2013

Q1
2011

Q3
2011

Q4
2011

Q1
2012

Q2
2012

Q3
2012

Q4
2012

Q1
2013

Bank of America,
N.A.

1.5%

0.8%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

1.2%

1.3%

0.0%

18.8% 8.2%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

22.0% 13.2% 6.0%

6.0%

5.0%

2.0%

3.0%

1.0%

3.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

2.0%

0.5%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

6.7%

1.3%

13.3% 5.5%

0.5%

1.0%

0.5%

1.0%

3.8%

6.0%

4.7%

10.0% 12.0% 6.0%

3.0%

4.0%

1.0%

3.1%

0.0%

1.0%

GMAC Mortgage,
LLC

4.7%

1.7%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

1.3%

2.0%

0.0%

8.3%

0.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

2.0%

6.0%

4.2%

4.2%

6.5%

4.0%

6.0% 10.0% 4.0%

2.0%

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

1.0%

0.7%

0.0%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

5.3%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.0%

0.5%

1.3%

1.3%

1.3%

14.0% 5.3%

2.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

4.0%

7.0%

2.0%

JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A.

1.6%

1.2%

0.0%

0.7%

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.2%

11.3% 3.2%

0.9%

1.0%

0.7%

1.7%

1.4%

3.8%

3.1%

31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0%

0.0%

2.0%

0.0%

1.0%

Litton Loan
Servicing, LP4

3.7%

3.3%

1.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6.3%

2.7%

2.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6.0%

2.0%

1.0%

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

6.7%

2.7%

0.0%

0.7%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.7%

10.3% 3.0%

2.4%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.3%

0.0%

0.0%

33.0% 2.0%

2.0%

2.0%

3.0%

3.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.0%

OneWest Bank

6.7%

0.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

3.7%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.3%

0.0%

11.0% 2.0%

2.0%

0.0%

3.0%

1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

0.0%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

2.0%

1.3%

2.3%

0.3%

0.8%

0.0%

3.0%

0.0%

0.7%

0.7%

0.7%

15.0% 10.0% 3.2%

1.0%

3.0%

2.0%

3.0%

2.0%

0.0%

Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A.

1.2%

0.4%

0.4%

0.0%

0.3%

1.0%

1.3%

3.0%

1.3%

6.0%

1.3%

1.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

1.0%

0.5%

0.3%

27.0% 4.4%

4.0%

2.0%

0.0%

1.0%

1.5%

1.0%

Servicer

Q2
2011

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%.
4 Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.
2 Second Look %

25

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

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

0.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

3.0%





-



< 5%

0.4%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results
 Bank of America, N.A. has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

26

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:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, N.A.

35.7%
40.5%
43.0%

Bank of
America, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

24
24
24
32
31
31

20

83.0%
84.5%
85.5%

30

75%

Dec. 2012
Mar. 2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
2.2%
3.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Sep. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Bank of
America, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

10

70%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Bank of
America, N.A.

0

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.

27

MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



1.3%



< 10%

4.7%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

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

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

28

MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials1

Results as of:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

26.6%
25.5%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

10%

20%

30%

43.3%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

24
23
23
32
31
31

10

20

75%

30

Mar. 2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.7%
0.4%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Dec. 2012

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

70%

Sep. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

86.5%
86.8%
87.3%

CitiMortgage, Inc.

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.
1 Per program guidance, CitiMortgage Inc. recently began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with reboarding of some of these modifications in subsequent months. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, these modifications are reported as Active Trials. Many of these loans are six months or more beyond
their first trial payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trial. Fluctuations over the next few reporting cycles are expected in this population for all servicers as they complete the re-boarding process.

29

MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC1
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

0.0%



< 10%

2.0%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

1.4%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results
 GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated
1 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected the
next quarterly assessment report.

30

MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, 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:
Best
Servicer
Performance

2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

32
31
31

0

10

20

30

75%

Dec. 2012
Mar. 2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Sep. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

70%

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

85.5%
85.1%
87.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

13
13
13

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.
1 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in
the next quarterly assessment report.

31

MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential, Inc.1
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend





< 10%

1.3%





-



< 5%

2.0%





-



< 5%

0.3%





-



Q1 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

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

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

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

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated
1

0.0%

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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

not be withheld at this time.

Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc. was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in the next quarterly assessment report.

32

MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential, Inc.1
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

10.1%
12.2%

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

34.7%
35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

29
29
28

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

89.4%
89.2%
92.4%

70%

20

30

75%

Dec. 2012
Mar. 20132

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
0.4%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Sep. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

32
31
31

Worst
Servicer
Performance

10

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Homeward
Residential, Inc.

0

Best
Servicer
Performance

3.9%
22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.
1 Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc. was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in the next quarterly assessment
report.
2 The metrics for March 2013 reflect the result of the transfer of the majority of the loans in the HAMP system of record from Homeward Residential to Ocwen Loan Servicing.

33

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

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



0.2%



< 10%

3.1%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 5%

1.4%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

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

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

34

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:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

5.2%
6.3%
10.1%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

70%

Best
Servicer
Performance

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

32
31
31

Worst
Servicer
Performance

20

30

40

Dec. 2012
Mar. 2013

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

32
31
31

10

Sep. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

0

87.7%
88.6%
89.5%

JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.6%
1.4%
22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.

35

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



0.7%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

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

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

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

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

36

MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

12.3%
11.9%
14.6%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

9
10
10

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

70%

20

30

40

80%

85%

Sep. 2012
Dec. 2012
Mar. 2013

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
1.0%
0.7%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

32
31
31

10

75%

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Best
Servicer
Performance

6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.

37

MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

0.0%



< 10%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results
 OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

38

MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

6.7%
9.3%
5.1%

OneWest Bank

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

14
14
13

OneWest Bank

32
31
31

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

10

90.3%
91.5%
92.0%

OneWest Bank

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

20

30

75%

Mar. 2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Best
Servicer
Performance

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

OneWest Bank

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Dec. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

70%

Sep. 2012

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.

39

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing
Compliance Results

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

1.3%



< 10%

0.7%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



< 5%

0.0%





-



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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results
 Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

40

MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing
Program Results

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

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Results as of:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

16.1%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

70%

Best
Servicer
Performance

Select Portfolio
Servicing

6
7
7

Select Portfolio
Servicing

32
31
31

10

20

30

75%

Mar. 2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.8%

1.9%
0.0%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Dec. 2012

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

6
7
7

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Sep. 20121

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

0

82.9%
82.2%
82.0%

Select Portfolio
Servicing

27.4%

15.0%

0%

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.

41

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

Overview


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



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



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

First Quarter 2013
Performance Category



Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Metric


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

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

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





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

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



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

Rating Legend



1.3%



< 10%

0.3%





-



< 5%

1.0%





-



< 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



< 4%

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



Rating

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



Servicer Result

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



Benchmark

Q1 Results

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

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

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

not be withheld at this time.

42

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 1

Results as of:
2.1%
1.0%
2.7%

Best
Servicer
Performance

11.0%
13.8%

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

26.4%
35.7%
40.5%
43.3%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases
6
7
7

Best
Servicer
Performance

25
25
25

10

20

30

75%

Mar. 2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
2.7%
0.3%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

40

Dec. 2012

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

32
31
31

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0

70%

Sep. 2012

79.9%
82.0%
80.6%

Worst
Servicer
Performance

Best
Servicer
Performance

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

89.3%
88.7%
88.7%

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

Worst
Servicer
Performance

0%

90.3%
91.5%
92.4%

Best
Servicer
Performance

22.8%

2.7%
3.9%

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.
1 Per program guidance, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. recently began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with reboarding of some of these modifications in subsequent months. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, these modifications are reported as Active Trials. Many of these loans are six months or more beyond
their first trial payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trial. Fluctuations over the next few reporting cycles are expected in this population for all servicers as they complete the re-boarding process.

43

MHA Servicer Assessment
Metrics Descriptions

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
of a borrower’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up Program Metrics
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.

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.
Treasury revised its Federally Declared Disaster (FDD)
guidance, allowing servicers to suspend OMR reporting
for loans where the homeowner was impacted by
Hurricane Sandy or any other FDD. This guidance may
impact missing OMR reporting.
For more information on the assessments, please visit:
www.FinancialStability.gov.

44

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

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, LLC2

Great Lakes Credit Union
Greater Nevada Mortgage Services
Green Tree Servicing LLC
Hartford Savings Bank
Hillsdale County National Bank
HomEq Servicing
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
Schools Financial Credit Union
Select Portfolio Servicing
Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial
Services, Inc.
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

4 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward
Bank of America, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP,
Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
Residential, Inc. was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition is reflected
2 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen in this report, except for the servicer assessment portion.
5 Formerly National City Bank.
Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in future reports.
3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation. 6 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.
1

45

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs
Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)
N.A.1

Bank of America,
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
CitiMortgage, Inc.
GMAC Mortgage, LLC2
Green Tree Servicing LLC
iServe Residential Lending, LLC
iServe Servicing, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
OneWest Bank
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage 4
Residential Credit Solutions
Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5

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, LLC2
Green Tree Servicing, LLC
Guaranty Bank
iServe Residential Lending, LLC
iServe Servicing, Inc.
James B. Nutter & Company
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 3
M&T Bank
Marix Servicing, LLC
Marsh Associates, Inc.
Midland Mortgage Company
Nationstar Mortgage ,LLC
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC6
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
PNC Mortgage4
Residential Credit Solutions
Schmidt Mortgage Company
Select Portfolio Servicing
Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc.
Stockman Bank of Montana
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5
Weststar Mortgage, Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
PNC Bank, National Association
PNC Mortgage 4
Residential Credit Solutions
Select Portfolio Servicing
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5

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.3
Magna Bank
Marix Servicing, LLC
Midland Mortgage Company
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.5

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

Bank of America, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in future
reports.
3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.
4 Formerly National City Bank.
5 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage FSB.
6 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.
1
2

46