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 Second Quarter 2015 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REPORT THROUGH THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2015 MHA AT-A-GLANCE More than 2.4 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions have taken place under Making Home Affordable (MHA) programs In August 2015, the Making Home Affordable website underwent a refresh, making it faster and easier for homeowners to find information about foreclosure prevention help. Our new site has simpler navigation and includes more information on how homeowners can remain successful once they are in the MHA program. There’s also an interactive social media hub that makes it easier for homeowners to stay connected with MHA news and share useful information with others. It is our goal to make the user experience as simple as possible, so that struggling homeowners are able to get the mortgage help they need. Check out the new website here: MakingHomeAffordable.gov. QUARTERLY PROGRAM VOLUMES FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2015 (Months of April, May and June) 1MP 2MP HAFA Q2: 57K PTD: 1.9M Q2: 2.7K PTD: 150K Q2: 16K PTD: 374K See Page 4 See Page 13 See Page 14 UP Q2: 1K PTD: 44K See Page 15 SECOND QUARTER 2015 SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS SERVICER MINOR IMPROVEMENT NEEDED MODERATE IMPROVEMENT NEEDED Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT NEEDED Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Changes have been made to the Servicer Assessment metrics and benchmarks effective with the second quarter of 2015. See page 17 for additional information on the changes and detailed results for this quarter. 2 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Table of Contents MHA PROGRAM UPDATES 4 HAMP PROGRAM RESULTS: HAMP Summary HAMP Tier 1 Payment Adjustment Summary HAMP Modification Characteristics Performance of Permanent HAMP Modifications Homeowners with Disqualified Modifications Post Modification Counseling 5 6 7 8-10 10 11 OTHER MHA PROGRAMS: Principal Reduction Alternative 2MP Program HAFA Program Unemployment Program 12 13 14 15 RESULTS BY SERVICER: MHA Program Activity by Servicer and Investor Servicer Assessment Results 16 17-23 APPENDIX: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Terms and Methodologies Compliance Criteria Tested End Notes HAMP Activity by State HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State HAMP Performance Data by Vintage HAMP Activity by MSA Note: For more 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. For information and quarterly updates about efforts taken by the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) beyond their participation in MHA which is not reflected in this report please visit the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report. For information on efforts undertaken by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) please visit its website. A-1 A-2 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7 A-8 3 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 MHA Program Updates • New this quarter: Reporting on the performance of HAMP Tier 2 permanent modifications is included in this quarter’s report. While the key drivers of performance and the performance over time are consistent with HAMP Tier 1, HAMP Tier 2 modifications have a slightly higher rate of disqualification. This is largely driven by the different eligibility requirements for HAMP Tier 2, including allowing for a higher debt to income range for homeowners and offering another opportunity to homeowners who lost good standing on their HAMP Tier 1 modification. • Beginning with the second quarter 2015, the framework of the MHA Servicer Assessment has been enhanced to add new metrics, consolidate or retire certain metrics, and tighten benchmarks against which we measure servicer performance. Servicers’ performance will now be assessed against eight metrics (previously seven). We expect these changes to provide additional insight into the impact of servicer performance on the borrower’s experience and foster further servicer improvements. Additional information regarding these changes can be found on page 17. • For the second quarter of 2015, servicers either sustained or decreased performance from the prior quarter, with one servicer moving from the “minor improvement” category into “substantial improvement” category, and two servicers moving from the “moderate improvement” category into the “substantial improvement” category. Several servicers experienced challenges with the implementation of processes to support HAMP interest rate step-up notice requirements. Other areas requiring servicers’ attention include income calculation accuracy, accurate identification and timely reporting of defaulted HAMP modifications, and proper identification and solicitation of eligible borrowers for HAMP. Additional information on this quarter’s results can be found beginning on page 18. Quarterly Trending of MHA Permanent Modifications Started & Estimated Number of Loans 60+ Days Delinquent* 3.0 60 50 2.5 40 30 2.0 20 10 0 Delinquent Loans (Millions) Permanent Modifications (Thousands) 70 1.5 Q1 2014 HAMP TIER 1 NON-GSE Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 HAMP TIER 1 GSE HAMP TIER 2 GSE SAI Q1 2015 FHA/RD-HAMP Q2 2015 60+ Days DLQ *Derived from the Mortgage Bankers Association Quarterly National Delinquency Survey The following table shows the program-to-date as well as this quarter’s activity for the various MHA programs: Program-to-Date Q2 2015 QoQ % Change 1,861,622 57,154 17% HAMP Tier 1 1,396,741 17,886 16% HAMP Tier 2 116,554 17,852 30% GSE Standard Modifications (SAI) 260,499 11,705 -7% 87,828 9,711 34% 2MP Modifications Started 149,577 2,652 18% HAFA Transactions Completed 373,863 16,475 1% UP Forbearance Plans Started 44,006 1,035 25% 2,429,068 77,316 13% MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications Started Treasury FHA and RD HAMP Cumulative Activity 4 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 HAMP Summary All Trials Started1 Tier 1 2,199,627 Tier 2 143,442 Active Trials 35,640 Trial Modifications Cancelled Since Verified Income Requirement* 96,529 Trial Modifications Permanent Modifications 2,343,069 All Permanent Modifications Started 1,513,295 Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)** 471,429 Active Permanent Modifications 985,061 * When Treasury launched HAMP in the spring of 2009, the housing crisis was severe. The number of homeowners already in default was high and servicers had not yet built systems to fully implement a national mortgage modification program. In an effort to provide assistance to struggling homeowners as soon as possible, servicers were not required to verify a homeowner’s income prior to commencing a trial modification. This resulted in many trials being cancelled if the homeowner could not ultimately provide the requisite documentation. Beginning in June 2010, servicers were required to verify a homeowner’s income prior to offering trial modifications, which substantially reduced the number of trial cancellations. Prior to that date, 697,605 trials were cancelled, for a cumulative 794,134 trials cancelled program-to-date. ** Does not include 55,841 loans paid off and 964 loans withdrawn. Outcome for Homeowners Who Do Not Receive a HAMP Modification While not all homeowners qualify for HAMP, many have found alternative solutions to their delinquency. For homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, or for those whose HAMP trial modifications were cancelled: • 58% received an alternative modification or resolved their delinquency. • 22% were referred to foreclosure. Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification or Those Whose HAMP Trial Modification was Cancelled 4% 19% 3% Action Pending Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process 3% Borrower Current / Loan Payoff 33% 13% Alternative Modification / Payment Plan Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu Foreclosure Starts 25% Source: Survey data from large servicers2 Foreclosure Completions 5 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 HAMP Tier 1 Payment Adjustment Summary • • • The HAMP Tier 1 modification was designed to provide relief to homeowners facing a financial hardship by providing a modification that would reduce their monthly mortgage payment to an affordable level. HAMP Tier 1 has reduced homeowners’ first lien mortgage payments by approximately 36% of the median before-modification payment. Under HAMP Tier 1, servicers apply a uniform loan modification waterfall to achieve a monthly mortgage payment of 31% DTI: capitalization, principal forgiveness (optional), interest rate reduction, term extension, principal forbearance. o The interest rate is reduced in increments to achieve the target 31% DTI with an interest rate floor of 2%. o After five years, the interest rate may begin to increase 1% per year (or less) until the Primary Mortgage Market Survey (PMMS) rate at time of modification is reached (PMMS averaged 5.04% in 2009 and 4.17% in 2014), at which time the interest rate will be fixed for the remaining loan term. 83% of HAMP Tier 1 homeowners will experience an interest rate increase after five years. o The first interest rate increase went into effect in Q3 2014 for the earliest group of HAMP modifications, who will begin to experience their second interest rate step-ups beginning in Q3 2015. o Through June 2015, approximately 200,000 homeowners have experienced an interest rate step-up. Based on early results, the rate increase does not appear to have an impact on the performance of these modifications. The percentage of modifications disqualifying in the month following the reset remains consistent with the months leading up to the reset, at less than or equal to 1%. o The majority of HAMP homeowners will experience two to three interest rate increases. o Homeowners who received a modification in 2009-2011 are more likely to experience three to four increases than homeowners who received a modification in 2012-2013, most of whom will experience two increases. o The median amount of the first monthly payment increase is $94, and the median monthly payment increase after the final interest rate increase is $210. Number of Interest Rate Increases by Quarter* 160,000 140,000 Number of Loans 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 First Increase Second Increase Third Increase Fourth Increase * As of June 2015. Assumes no re-defaults of active HAMP Tier 1 modifications. See Appendix 5 for additional information on HAMP Tier 1 rate increases by state. 6 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Select HAMP Modification Characteristics Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated at approximately $36.7 billion, program-to-date, compared with unmodified mortgage obligations. HAMP modifications follow a series of waterfall steps that include capitalization, interest rate adjustment, term extension, and principal forbearance/forgiveness. HAMP has two evaluation tiers: • Under HAMP Tier 1, servicers apply the modification steps in sequence until the homeowner’s postmodification front-end debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is 31%. The impact of each modification step can vary to achieve the target of 31%. • Under HAMP Tier 2, servicers apply the modification steps simultaneously to achieve a post-modification DTI that falls within an allowable range (subject to investor restrictions). HAMP Tier 2 applies to non-GSE mortgages only. Homeowner Characteristics Modification Steps for Permanent Modifications All permanent modifications reflect some combination of the following modification steps: Characteristic Tier 1 Tier 2 All 94.0% Median Monthly Gross Income $3,912 $5,075 $3,985 80.2% 61.2% Median Credit Score 565 559 565 32.1% 30.9% Median Property Value $177,000 $147,000 $175,000 Modification Step Tier 1 Tier 2 All Interest Rate Reduction 95.9% 71.7% Term Extension 59.6% Principal Forbearance 30.7% Select Median Permanent Modification Characteristics Loan Before After Characteristic Modification Modification Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio Median Decrease Additional HAMP Tier 2 Characteristics HAMP Tier 2 provides another modification opportunity for struggling homeowners who do not qualify for a HAMP Tier 1 modification, or for those who lose good standing (by missing three payments) on their HAMP Tier 1 modification. Of the HAMP Tier 2 trial modifications started: Tier 1 43.9% 31.0% -13.5 pct pts Tier 2 28.0% 20.9% -6.4 pct pts All 43.2% 31.0% -12.7 pct pts • 26% were previously in a HAMP Tier 1 trial or permanent modification. • 12% were previously evaluated for HAMP Tier 1 and did not meet eligibility requirements. • 6% were non-owner-occupied properties. Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio Tier 1 67.8% 50.8% -13.8 pct pts Tier 2 43.7% 36.3% -6.5 pct pts All 66.0% 49.4% -12.9 pct pts Median Monthly Housing Payment Tier 1 $1,387.07 $817.25 ($500.64) Tier 2 $1,043.25 $681.51 ($328.41) All $1,360.98 $807.15 ($483.05) 7 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Performance of HAMP Permanent Modifications Differences in modification characteristics contribute to differences in the performance of HAMP modifications. The key drivers of performance are highlighted on the following page. Those drivers can also affect the performance of certain vintages and contribute to differences in performance between HAMP Tier 1 and Tier 2. HAMP Tier 1 # Months Post Modification 3 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 HAMP Tier 2 The tables below show the performance of HAMP permanent modifications at various seasoning points for those modifications that have aged to, or past, the number of months noted. It is important to note that far fewer loans have reached these seasoning points for HAMP Tier 2 than for HAMP Tier 1. # Months Post Modification 3 6 12 18 24 30 % of Disqualified HAMP Tier 1 Modifications3 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 2.1% 6.7% 16.3% 22.9% 28.9% 33.4% 37.6% 41.1% 43.6% 46.0% 48.0% 1.7% 6.7% 15.5% 22.7% 28.0% 32.6% 36.6% 39.3% 41.6% 43.5% 46.3% 1.2% 5.3% 12.7% 18.9% 23.7% 27.3% 30.0% 32.5% 36.1% 39.1% 1.0% 4.3% 10.3% 15.3% 19.1% 22.1% 25.6% 28.3% 0.8% 3.8% 9.4% 13.9% 17.5% 19.8% 1.2% 4.6% 10.4% 13.6% 0.9% 4.3% 1.2% ALL 1.3% 5.5% 13.2% 19.5% 24.7% 29.1% 33.3% 36.8% 40.3% 43.6% 46.5% % of Disqualified HAMP Tier 2 Modifications3 N/A 2012 2013 2014 1.4% 5.3% 16.6% 22.3% 27.6% 31.0% 1.8% 7.7% 17.0% 24.1% 28.5% 34.3% 1.7% 7.0% 16.1% 22.9% Q1 2015 Q2 2015 1.2% 5.6% 1.1% ALL 1.6% 7.1% 16.6% 23.9% 28.4% 32.2% Drivers of Performance by Tier HAMP Tier 1 Performance by Investor HAMP Tier 2 Performance by Prior Modification History Modifications of private label security loans have the highest delinquency rates, followed by modifications of portfolio loans and GSE loans. Portfolio 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 12 18 24 With Prior Tier 1 Modification Without Prior Tier 1 Modification Private 30 36 42 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 90+ Day Delinquency Rate GSE Modifications that were previously modified under HAMP Tier 1 have a higher likelihood of disqualifying from the subsequent Tier 2 modification. Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification See Appendix 6 for additional information on HAMP performance by vintage. 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 12 18 24 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 30 8 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Drivers of Performance for HAMP Tier 1 and HAMP Tier 2 Modifications The most significant factor driving HAMP modification performance is the amount of the reduction in the monthly mortgage payment, followed by the length of the homeowner’s delinquency at the start of the trial modification and the homeowner’s credit score at the time of modification. Performance by Monthly Payment Reduction Payment reduction is strongly correlated with permanent modification sustainability. For modifications seasoned 24 months, only 15.0% of modifications with a monthly payment reduction greater than 50% have been disqualified due to missing three payments, compared to a disqualification rate of 39.1% where the payment had been cut by 20% or less. <=20% 20%-30% 30%-40% 40%-50% >50% 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 12 18 24 30 36 42 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification Performance by Credit Score at the Time of Modification Homeowners with credit scores between 580-619 at the time of modification experienced a 19.9% re-default rate in the subsequent 24 months, compared to a rate of 10.4% for homeowners whose credit scores were above 660. 580 - 619 620 - 660 Homeowners who were 31 to 90 days delinquent at the start of the HAMP trial period experienced a 22.3% redefault rate in the subsequent 24 months, compared to 28.5% for homeowners whose delinquency was between 121 and 210 days at trial start. <= 30 Days 121 - 210 Days > 660 60% 31 - 90 Days > 210 Days 91 - 120 Days 60% 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 90+ Day Delinquency Rate < 580 Performance by Delinquency at Trial Start 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 12 18 24 30 36 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 42 12 18 24 30 36 42 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 9 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Incremental Performance of HAMP Modifications over Time 3-Month Re-default Rate The longer homeowners remain in HAMP without defaulting, the less likely they are to default on their mortgage in the future. For example, the percent of loans active in month 12 that disqualified by month 15 is lower than the percent of loans active in month six that disqualified by month nine. 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% Conditional Re-default Rate by Modification Year (% of Active Loans) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Month 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification Note: A modification's inclusion in the 3-month re-default rate calculation is conditional on the modification being active at the start of the 3-month period being measured. Homeowners with Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications Homeowners at risk of foreclosure have more options due to industry-wide changes instituted since the launch of HAMP. In addition, 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 prohibited from commencing foreclosure proceedings until the homeowner is evaluated for other loss mitigation action. The majority of homeowners who disqualify from a HAMP permanent modification receive an alternative to foreclosure or resolve their delinquency. Homeowners can also take advantage of other MHA and/or government sponsored assistance programs. Of the homeowners who have missed three payments, and therefore disqualified from HAMP, approximately 24% have been referred to foreclosure. Status of Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications Action Pending 16% 8% 5% Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process Borrower Current / Loan Payoff 8% 15% Alternative Modification / Payment Plan Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu 13% Foreclosure Starts Foreclosure Completions Source: Survey data from large servicers2 35% 10 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Post-Modification Counseling Since March 2014, Treasury has required certain HAMP participating servicers to offer free financial counseling to homeowners with non-GSE loans who are either entering a HAMP trial modification, or are in a permanent HAMP modification and are at risk of re-default. The counseling is designed to help the homeowner stay current in the modification by addressing the homeowner’s current overall financial situation, and the financial hardship that caused the homeowner to default on his or her mortgage loan. Through June 2015, participating servicers have referred nearly 287,000 homeowners to financial counseling. Of these referrals: • • 61% are permanent modifications considered by the servicers to be at risk of disqualifying from HAMP, 39% are new trials. Nearly 19,000 homeowners started financial counseling, including more than 5,300 who have completed counseling (multiple sessions spanning several months), resulting in an overall take up rate of 6.5%. Counseling Referral Activity by Servicer At-Risk New Trials 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Bank of CitiMortgage, JPMorgan Nationstar Ocwen Loan Select Wells Fargo America, N.A. Inc. Chase Bank, Mortgage LLC Servicing, LLC Portfolio Bank, N.A. N.A. Servicing, Inc. % of Referrals Who Take Up Counseling 4% 9% 15% 2% 3% 9% 8% Other Servicers 10% Note: Data on Post-Modification Counseling is collected from sixteen servicers via survey. Additionally, servicer take-up rates will vary due to timing of referrals and individual servicer program design. 11 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) has broadened the use of principal reduction in mortgage modifications as a tool to help underwater homeowners. Servicers of non-GSE loans are required to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction under HAMP PRA for mortgages with a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio greater than 115% when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for principal reduction, they are not required to reduce principal as part of the modification. Under HAMP, servicers provide principal reduction on HAMP modifications in two ways: • Under HAMP 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. • 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. HAMP Modifications with Earned Principal Reduction Under PRA4 HAMP Modifications with Upfront Principal Reduction Outside of PRA 191,573 147,488 50,909 39,333 242,482 186,821 $67,237 $53,980 $63,740 32.4% 18.0% 30.5% $17,079,771,205 $3,359,056,858 $20,438,828,063 Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible Loans All Permanent Modifications Started Active Permanent Modifications Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent Modifications Started5 Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent Modifications Started (%)6 Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Permanent Modifications Started5 90% 84% 80% 71% 70% 61% 60% 50% 77% 65% 77% 71% 72% 65% 73% 60% 53% 42% 42% Q4 2010 Q1 2011 77% 73% 66% Total HAMP Modifications with Principal Reduction 70% 70% 71% 72% 60% 61% 64% 67% 69% 61% 66% 62% 53% 46% 40% 30% 20% Q2 Q3 2011 2011 Tier 1 PRA Q4 2011 Q1 Q2 2012 2012 Tier 2 PRA Q3 2012 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 Tier 1 All Principal Reduction Q1 2014 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 Tier 2 All Principal Reduction Modification Characteristics: HAMP vs. HAMP with Principal Reduction All HAMP Modifications Permanent Modifications – Median LTV ratio: - Before Modification - After Modification Permanent Modifications – Median Before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio: - Front-End DTI - Back-End DTI Total HAMP Modifications with Principal Reduction 116.9% 115.0% 143.5% 107.5% 43.2% 66.0% 42.7% 54.8% 12 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 The Second Lien Modification Program The Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) provides additional assistance to homeowners in a first lien permanent modification who have an eligible second lien with a participating servicer, including second liens with a qualifying first lien modified under the GSEs’ Standard Modification program. This assistance can result in a modification of the second lien, as well as a full or partial extinguishment of the second lien. Second lien modifications follow a series of steps that may include capitalization, interest rate reduction, term extension, and principal forbearance or forgiveness. All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)* 149,577 Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 41,687 Active Second Lien Modifications** 84,426 Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments 10,926 * Includes 6,478 loans that have a qualifying first lien GSE Standard Modification. ** Includes 7,996 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. 2MP Modification Characteristics Median Monthly Payment Reduction: Second lien official modifications Debt Extinguishment: HAMP homeowners receiving partial or full extinguishment Reduction on second lien only $153 Total Outstanding Principal Balance Extinguished Combined first and second lien reduction $764 % of total monthly payment 41% Top Three States by Activity: Percent of Total 2MP Modifications Started Second Lien Full Extinguishments: Combined first and second lien reduction % of total monthly payment $989 51% $3.2B California 34% Florida 10% New York 7% Estimated Eligible 2nd Liens7 2MP Participating Servicer Name 2MP Modifications Started Current Estimated Eligible 2nd Liens Bank of America, N.A. 36,938 6,952 CitiMortgage, Inc. 19,274 2,220 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 41,875 1,946 5,853 492 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 23,028 5,186 Other Servicers 22,609 1,284 149,577 18,080 Nationstar Mortgage LLC Total Note: Only five of the seven largest SPA servicers participate in 2MP. 13 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Program offers incentives and a streamlined process for homeowners looking to exit their homes or sell a rental property through a short sale or deed-in-lieu (DIL) 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 DIL programs, such that their Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s HAFA program. In HAFA transactions, homeowners who need to relocate: • Follow a streamlined process for short sales and deed-in-lieu transactions that requires no verification of income (unless 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; and • Receive $10,000* in relocation assistance at closing. *Note: Prior to February 1, 2015 homeowners received $3,000. HAFA Activity by Investor Type Participating servicers must consider all homeowners denied for HAMP for a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure through the HAFA program. However, individual investors can impose additional eligibility requirements. Private Short Sale Deed-in-Lieu Total Transactions Completed Portfolio GSE Total 133,063 47,330 147,961 328,354 7,043 3,613 34,853 45,509 140,106 50,943 182,814 373,863 Characteristics of Non-GSE HAFA Activity Non-GSE HAFA Debt Relief & Release of Subordinate Liens Through HAFA, homeowners can be relieved of significant unpaid principal balances. Median Unpaid Principal Balance Before HAFA $276,235 Median Sales Price $165,000 Median Debt Relief $124,916 Median Debt Relief as % of UPB Total Debt Relief (cumulative) 47% $25.5B In addition to satisfying the primary mortgage debt, as part of a HAFA short sale or deed-in-lieu the homeowner must be fully released from liability for subordinate liens. % of HAFA transactions completed that included release of a homeowner’s subordinate liens Total subordinate liens released (cumulative) In 15% of HAFA transactions completed, the homeowner began a HAMP trial modification but later requested a HAFA agreement or was disqualified from HAMP. Non-GSE HAFA Activity by State Top Three States by HAFA Activity: % of HAFA Transactions Completed California 36% Florida 17% Arizona 5% 40% $477M 14 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 The Home Affordable Unemployment Program The Home Affordable Unemployment Program (UP) provides assistance to homeowners who are unable to make their mortgage payments as a result of unemployment. Unemployed homeowners can receive 12 months of forbearance, during which mortgage payments are reduced or suspended, allowing homeowners to seek employment without fear that they will lose their homes to foreclosure. All UP Forbearance Plans Started 44,006 UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 37,488 UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 6,518 UP Activity by State Top Three States by UP Activity: % of UP Forbearance Plans Started California 24% Florida 7% Illinois 5% Status of Homeowners Who Completed an UP Forbearance Plan 3% 2% 2% 16% 30% Foreclosure Started Foreclosure Completed Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu 1% Alternative Modification / Payment Plan UP Forbearance Plan Extension New HAMP Trial 21% Borrower Current / Loan Payoff Other* 24% *Other dispositions include Bankruptcy, Charge-Off, and Action Pending 15 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Making Home Affordable Program Activity by Servicer As of June 2015, there are 129 servicers that participate in Treasury’s MHA programs, but seven servicers make up nearly 90% of non-GSE HAMP modifications. Program activity for these servicers is provided below. Servicer HAMP Tier 1 Permanent Modifications HAMP Tier 2 2MP PRA8 Permanent Permanent Modifications Modifications Modifications HAFA9 non-GSE Transactions Completed 101,676 3,189 5,827 36,938 48,620 39,244 4,340 4,197 19,274 1,769 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 173,651 1,979 24,876 41,875 36,808 Nationstar Mortgage LLC 152,843 13,980 9,721 5,853 7,529 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 265,539 50,137 87,283 N/A 22,862 82,186 14,358 13,631 N/A 16,919 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 199,683 8,473 30,791 23,028 35,173 Other Servicers 381,919 20,098 15,247 22,609 21,369 1,396,741 116,554 191,573 149,577 191,049 Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Total HAMP Permanent Modifications by Investor HAMP Permanent Modifications Servicer GSE Private Portfolio Total Bank of America, N.A. 40,855 45,082 18,928 104,865 CitiMortgage, Inc. 17,809 8,747 17,028 43,584 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 76,667 57,669 41,294 175,630 Nationstar Mortgage LLC 94,972 66,515 5,336 166,823 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 54,638 238,859 22,179 315,676 683 86,753 9,108 96,544 80,651 43,914 83,591 208,156 Other Servicers 279,847 59,843 62,327 402,017 Total 646,122 607,382 259,791 1,513,295 Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 16 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Making Home Affordable Servicer Assessments Background Since the MHA’s inception in the spring of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage servicers. Freddie Mac, acting as Treasury’s compliance agent, has created a separate division known as Making Home Affordable–Compliance (MHA-C), which evaluates servicers’ compliance with MHA guidelines through regular compliance reviews. MHA-C examines as many as 60 compliance criteria (see Appendix 1) and tests between 400 and 600 loan files each quarter at each of the largest servicers. Loan samples are randomly selected for testing from two sources: the MHA transactions reported by each servicer into the MHA system of record and the servicer’s records of non-performing loans. This approach provides comprehensive insight into how each servicer is implementing MHA programs. This includes, for example, whether the servicer is properly identifying, contacting and evaluating borrowers who are potentially eligible for MHA, as well as the accuracy and timeliness of the MHA data reported by the servicer. MHA-C reports the results of each compliance review to Treasury and the servicer. Treasury requires servicers to take remedial actions which include, but are not limited to: identifying and re-evaluating any affected loans, performing retroactive analysis when an issue is potentially systemic, and enhancing the effectiveness of internal controls. It is important to note that servicer participation in MHA is voluntary, based on a contract with Fannie Mae as financial agent on behalf of Treasury. 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 noncompliance, 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 permanent modifications under HAMP and completed transactions under HAFA. MHA Servicer Assessments In 2011, Treasury began publishing quarterly servicer assessments for the large servicers participating in MHA to improve transparency and drive servicers to improve their performance. The assessments highlight the results of MHA compliance reviews and rate the level of improvement needed. In addition, the assessments include program data reported by servicers into the MHA system of record. These program results are key indicators of how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible homeowners and report program data to Treasury. The assessment does not rate the program results, but compares each servicer’s performance for a given quarter against the other large servicers participating in the program. Effective this quarter, changes were made to the assessments to focus on new or emerging areas of interest, provide additional insight into the impact of servicer performance on homeowners’ experience, and foster further improvement in servicer performance. The changes include: addition of three metrics that address respectively, timely evaluation of borrowers for HAMP, accuracy of interest rate step-up changes, and timeliness and completeness of interest rate step-up notices; consolidation of two “second look” metrics; removal of the non-approval metric, and tightened performance benchmarks. Each quarter, Treasury reviews the compliance results and ratings, the program results, and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not limited to, a servicer’s progress in remediating previously identified issues) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial, moderate or minor improvement to its overall performance under MHA. 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 withhold 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, not incentives paid to servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors. Please refer to Appendices 1 & 3 for more information concerning the MHA Servicer Assessments. 17 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 2nd Quarter 2015 Servicer Assessment Summary Results Improvement Needed Minor Moderate Servicer Name JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. CitiMortgage, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Bank of America, N.A. Substantial Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC The table above summarizes the results of the MHA Servicer Assessments for the second quarter of 2015. The compliance and program results for the individual servicers can be found on the following pages. Servicers either met or approached Treasury’s benchmark on compliance metrics relating to assignment of a single point of contact; timely evaluation of borrowers for HAMP; calculation of incentive payments; and accurate processing of interest rate step-up changes. Several servicers experienced challenges implementing requirements related to interest rate step-up notices. Also, some servicers needed improvement with respect to income calculation accuracy, accurate identification and timely reporting of defaulted HAMP modifications, and proper identification and solicitation of eligible borrowers for HAMP. Bank of America, Nationstar, and Ocwen were found to need substantial improvement. After considering all relevant factors, Treasury determined that withholding incentives from these three servicers was not warranted this quarter. In making this determination, Treasury considered the fact that the area where these servicers required the most improvement was with the initial phase of issuing interest rate step-up notices, which are reminders to borrowers of the terms contained in the original modification agreement. Each servicer has since begun addressing the root causes of the errors. Treasury also considered the level of borrower impact, servicers’ performance in other metrics, progress on remediation of prior issues, and program results. However, Treasury will consider withholding servicer incentives in the future if the servicers’ performance does not improve. 18 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Compliance Metrics Overview The metrics and benchmarks below reflect compliance areas tested and reported on across the large servicers to determine servicers’ adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Servicer results (see overleaf) reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. The below asterisked (*) benchmarks were set at 5% in previous quarters. Please refer to Appendix 1 for more information concerning the metrics described below. Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and communicates decisions timely. Program Management and Reporting Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, submits timely and accurate program reports and information and whether the servicer accurately and timely communicates interest rate step-ups. Metric Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance Benchmark Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single Point of Contact to a homeowner in accordance with MHA guidelines 2.0%* Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with or was unable to conclude on the servicer's MHA eligibility determination for applicable programs 2.0% Second Look % Noncompliance Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% for applicable programs 2.0% Timely HAMP Evaluation % Noncompliance Percentage of loans reviewed for which MHA-C determined the servicer did not complete the evaluation within the prescribed time frame for reasons within the servicer’s control 2.0% Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs 2.0% Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines 2.0%* Interest Rate Step-Up Changes Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C noted discrepancies between the terms of the interest rate stepup in the official modification agreement and payment application in the loan payment history 5.0% Interest Rate Step-Up Notices Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C noted that the interest rate step-up notices sent by the servicer were not in accordance with MHA guidelines 5.0% 19 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 2nd Quarter Compliance Results Single Point Timely Disqualified Second of Contact Incentive Interest Rate Interest Rate HAMP Income Modification Look Assignment Step-Up Step-Up Calculation Evaluation % Payment NonNonNonNonChanges Notices Data Errors Error compliance compliance compliance compliance Servicer BENCHMARK Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 5.0% 5.0% Servicer Results 0.0% 0.5% 6.0% 0.0% 2.5% 2.3% 2.0% 18.9% Rating *** *** * *** ** ** *** * Servicer Results 0.0% 2.5% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 3.8% 2.0% 41.8% Rating *** ** *** *** *** ** *** * Servicer Results 1.5% 0.5% 0.0% 3.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% Rating *** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** Servicer Results 0.0% 9.5% 1.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.8% 2.0% 37.5% Rating *** * *** *** *** *** *** * Servicer Results 0.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.2% 7.3% 0.0% 35.0% Rating *** *** *** *** *** * *** * Servicer Results 0.0% 0.5% 3.0% 0.0% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% Rating *** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Results 3.0% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 2.8% 0.0% 4.0% Rating ** ** *** *** *** ** *** *** 20 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Compliance Results Trending The trending table has been expanded this quarter to reflect the results across five assessment metrics. Servicer Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. * ** Note: 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 2014 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 Second Look % Noncompliance (Combined)* 0.0% 0.9% 1.4% 1.4% 0.0% 5.6% 4.3% 1.4% 15.2% 4.2% 3.0% 1.4% 2.3% 0.5% 0.9% N/A 1.7% 1.6% 1.4% 0.0% 2.3% 4.8% 3.5% 1.6% 3.1% 1.7% 5.7% 1.2% 0.6% 2.3% 4.4% 3.1% 2.6% 2.8% 1.4% Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance 1.3% 4.7% 1.4% 4.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 1.1% 2.6% 4.7% 7.9% 2.8% 0.0% N/A 3.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.4% 1.4% 0.0% 1.6% 0.0% 1.8% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 3.4% 3.9% 6.7% 4.2% Income Calculation Error % 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 2.0% 6.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% N/A 3.0% 3.0% 5.0% 4.0% 0.5% 0.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 2.1% 3.1% 6.0% 6.0% 3.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% Incentive Payment Data Errors % ** 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 0.2% 0.3% 1.7% 0.8% 0.7% 1.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% N/A 3.4% 0.6% 1.7% 2.0% 0.5% 1.6% 0.5% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.4% 1.1% 0.6% 1.5% 1.7% 1.1% 1.1% 0.4% Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance 0.0% 10.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.0% 10.0% 3.3% 16.0% 6.0% 12.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% N/A 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 6.7% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 8.0% 2014 Q4 2015 Q1 2015 Q2 1.4% 3.7% 1.4% 1.5% 1.0% 2.2% 1.4% 1.4% 4.9% 0.4% 6.9% 1.9% 0.5% 1.4% 0.5% 2.5% 0.5% 9.5% 2.0% 0.5% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% 1.0% 3.0% 0.0% 3.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 1.0% 5.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.0% 6.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.6% 0.1% 0.2% 0.6% 2.2% 0.8% 0.3% 0.5% 0.0% 1.0% 0.7% 1.2% 0.3% 2.5% 1.0% 0.1% 1.5% 0.2% 1.6% 0.9% 0.8% 8.8% 0.0% 6.8% 3.8% 0.8% 6.8% 0.8% 2.3% 0.0% 2.0% 1.8% 0.0% 9.3% 2.3% 3.8% 0.0% 0.8% 7.3% 0.0% 2.8% Prior to Q2 2015, this metric was previously two separate metrics, "Second Look % Disagree" and "Second Look % Unable to Determine. For comparative purposes, we have combined the historical results of these two metrics into one percentage. Beginning with the Q2 2015 Assessment, the Incentive Payment Data Errors metric includes PRA testing. When calculating error percentages from prior quarter’s published figures, it may result in a slightly different percentage due to rounding. 21 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Program Results Trials Aged 6+ Months (% of Active Trials)10 40% Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 30% 20% 10% Average # Aged Trials % of Active Trials 6+ Months This quarterly metric measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share of all active trials. These figures include trial modifications that have been cancelled or converted to permanent modifications by the servicer and are pending reporting to the program system of record. Additionally, servicers may process cancellations of permanent modifications for various reasons, including, but not limited to, data corrections, loan repurchase agreements, etc. 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 reporting periods. 0% Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase N.A. Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Q3’14 495 411 351 1,378 943 504 672 Q4’14 214 390 304 1,149 548 362 651 Q1’15 210 319 279 1,640 1,123 385 503 Q2’15 264 256 255 436 670 142 411 Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases This quarterly metric measures servicer response time for homeowner inquiries escalated to MHA Support Centers. Effective February 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 includes non-GSE cases escalated on or after February 1, 2011. Investor denial cases escalated prior to November 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. 35 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 30 # Days 25 20 15 10 5 0 Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase N.A. Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Wells Fargo Bank, Servicing, Inc. N.A. 22 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Program Results Timely Reporting of Permanent Modifications (% Reported within the Month of Conversion) % Reported Timely This quarterly metric measures the servicer’s ability to promptly report the conversion from a trial to a permanent modification. Untimely reporting of permanent modification conversions impacts incentive compensation, including the possible delay of homeowner incentives. In addition, it hinders the effectiveness of program monitoring and transparency. Q3 2014 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Q4 2014 Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase N.A. Bank, N.A. Q1 2015 Nationstar Mortgage LLC Q2 2015 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Missing Permanent Modification Status Reports (%) This quarterly metric measures the servicer’s ability to promptly report on the current status of permanent modifications. 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 the reporting of permanent modification status for loans where the homeowner was impacted by Hurricane Sandy or any other FDD. This revised guidance may impact missing permanent modification status reporting. 8% Q3 2014 7% Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 % Missing 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. N.A. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 23 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) provides eligible homeowners the opportunity to lower their first lien mortgage payment through a loan modification. HAMP includes a Tier 1 modification for Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) and nonGSE homeowners and a Tier 2 for non-GSE homeowners. In October 2011, the GSEs launched the Servicer Alignment Initiative (SAI), creating the GSE Standard Modification. Tier 2 is modeled after the GSE Standard Modification and expands HAMP eligibility to include homeowners with properties currently occupied by a tenant as well as vacant properties the homeowner intends to rent. Treasury FHA-HAMP provides first lien modifications for distressed homeowners in loans insured or guaranteed through the Federal Housing Administration. The FHA introduced FHA-HAMP to provide assistance to borrowers with FHA-insured loans who are unable to meet their mortgage payments. Treasury pays incentives to servicers for FHA-insured first lien non-GSE mortgages that are modified under Treasury FHA-HAMP guidelines. RD-HAMP provides first lien modifications for distressed homeowners in loans guaranteed through the Rural Housing Service. The Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) provides modifications and extinguishments on second liens when there has been an eligible first lien modification on the same property. The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Program provides transition alternatives to foreclosure in the form of a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. The GSE Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program. The Home Affordable Unemployment Program (UP) provides temporary forbearance of mortgage principal to enable unemployed homeowners to look for a new job without fear of foreclosure. General MHA Program Notes: MHA Program Effective Dates: HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009 PRA: October 1, 2010 2MP: August 13, 2009 HAFA: April 5, 2010 HAMP, PRA, Treasury FHA-HAMP, RD-HAMP, 2MP, and HAFA program data include activity reported into the HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for the current reporting month, though the effective date may occur in the following month. MHA First Lien Program Notes: MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications Started includes: HAMP Tier 1, HAMP Tier 2, GSE Standard Modifications and both Treasury FHA- and RD-HAMP. HAMP Tier 1 includes both GSE and non-GSE modifications. The GSEs do not participate in HAMP Tier 2, however the GSE Standard Modification is similar to HAMP Tier 2. Treasury's FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP are similar to HAMP Tier 1. GSE Standard Modification data is provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of June 2015. The GSEs undertake other foreclosure prevention activities beyond their participation in MHA that are not reflected in this report. The latest Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report can be found at: www.FHFA.gov. Treasury FHA-HAMP Program Notes: The FHA undertakes foreclosure prevention activities beyond their participation in MHA that are not reflected in this report. Please refer to the latest edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing Scorecard for the total number of loss mitigation and early delinquency interventions FHA has offered since April 1, 2009. Please visit www.hud.gov to view the latest Housing Scorecard. 24 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes 2MP Program Notes: Number of modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections. 2MP loans previously reported under top servicers that were transferred to or acquired by non-participating 2MP servicers are reflected in “Other Servicers.” Homeowners with an active first lien permanent modification who have also received a 2MP modification realize a higher monthly payment reduction on their first lien compared to the overall population of first line homeowners as the median first lien unpaid principal balance is higher. HAFA Program Notes: Unless otherwise noted, HAFA Transactions Completed 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 June 2015. It does not include other GSE short sale and DIL activity outside the HAFA program. Please refer to the latest Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the total number of short sales and DIL of foreclosure actions the GSEs have completed since 4Q 2008. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. A short sale requires a third-party purchaser and cooperation of junior lien holders and mortgage insurers to complete the transaction. The debt relief represents the obligation relieved by the short sale or deed-in-lieu transaction and is calculated as the unpaid principal balance and allowable transactions costs less the property sales price. The allowable transaction costs may include release of any subordinate lien, homeowner relocation assistance, sales commission, and closing costs for taxes, title, and attorney fees. PRA Program Notes: Eligible loans include those receiving evaluation under HAMP PRA guidelines plus loans that did not require an evaluation but received principal reduction on their modification. Servicer Assessment Notes: Treasury’s foremost goal is to assist struggling homeowners who may be eligible for MHA. This population represents only a portion of each servicer’s overall mortgage servicing operation. Treasury’s compliance reviews solely assess compliance with MHA requirements established by Treasury under contracts with participating servicers. Treasury does not assess servicers’ compliance with rules or requirements established by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (the GSEs) or the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), among others. Moreover, Treasury cannot and does not assess compliance of servicing activities outside of MHA. Servicers’ compliance with laws or regulations relating to mortgage servicing are enforced by other Federal agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), or by state authorities. The servicer assessments have set a benchmark for providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing against specific metrics. Although the compliance reviews that form the basis for the servicer assessments 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, the compliance reviews use “sampling” as a testing methodology. Sampling, an industry-accepted auditing technique, looks at a subset of a particular population of transactions, rather than the entirety of the population of transactions, to assess a servicer’s overall performance in that particular activity. 25 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Compliance Metrics Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance: Servicers are required to assign certain delinquent homeowners to a Single Point of Contact (SPOC). This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a SPOC to a homeowner in a timely fashion and otherwise in accordance with MHA guidelines. For SPOC Assignment Noncompliance results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: assigning a SPOC to the homeowner, and correcting system and operational processes such that SPOCs are properly assigned to homeowners in a timely fashion. Second Look % Noncompliance:* Second Look is a process in which MHA-C reviews potentially eligible loans not in a permanent modification, to assess the timeliness and accuracy of the servicer’s homeowner outreach and eligibility review in order to verify that the homeowner was properly considered, denied or deemed ineligible for receiving a permanent modification. This metric measures the combined percentage of loans reviewed in Second Look where MHA-C disagreed with a servicer’s solicitation efforts and/or eligibility review and for which MHA-C is not able to determine, based on the documentation provided, whether the homeowner was properly considered, denied or deemed ineligible for receiving a permanent modification. For Second Look Noncompliance results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: reconsidering homeowners for a modification if they were not properly solicited or incorrectly evaluated, retaining documentation to support solicitation efforts and eligibility determination, and, if applicable, engaging in systemic process remediation. All loans categorized as noncompliant remain on foreclosure hold until the servicer completes the appropriate corrective actions. Income Calculation Error %: Correctly calculating homeowners’ monthly income is a critical component of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an accurate modification payment. This metric measures how often MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s calculation of a homeowner’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up to a 5% differential from MHA-C’s calculations. For Income Calculation Errors, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting income errors, requiring the servicer to review their own income calculation accuracy, enhancing policies and procedures, and conducting staff training on income calculation. Timely HAMP Evaluation % Noncompliance:** Servicers are required to evaluate borrowers for HAMP within 30 calendar days from the date a complete loss mitigation application is received. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed for which MHA-C determined the servicer did not complete the evaluation within the prescribed time frame for reasons within the servicer’s control. For Timely HAMP Evaluation Noncompliance, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting operational issues such that borrowers are evaluated in a timely manner, and implementing controls that allow servicer management to identify and prioritize HAMP eligibility determinations are at risk of being delayed. * Two previously reported metrics, Second Look % Disagree and Second Look % Unable to Determine were combined into this new metric effective Q2 2015. ** New metric effective Q2 2015. 26 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury provides incentives for servicers, investors, and homeowners for permanent modifications completed under MHA. Although intended for different recipients, all incentives are initially paid to servicers to distribute to the appropriate parties. Data that servicers report to the program system of record is used to calculate the incentives due to servicers, investors, and homeowners. This metric measures how data anomalies between servicer loan files and the reported information affect incentive payments. For Incentive Payment Data Error results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting the identified errors and correcting system and operational processes such that accurate data is mapped to its appropriate places in the program system of record. Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance: Permanent modifications on which homeowners lose good standing are subsequently disqualified from the program. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with a servicer’s processing of defaulted HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines. For Disqualified Modification results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting the status of improperly disqualified modifications and reporting the corrected data to the program system of record. Interest Rate Step-up Changes:** In year five of a borrower’s modification, the interest rate on their modification may increase. This metric measures whether the step payment interest rate and principal and interest payment were applied in accordance with the terms of the Modification Agreement. For Interest Rate Step-Up Change results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: reversing incorrect payment applications within the servicer’s system and re-applying payments according to the terms of the Interest Rate Step-Up and correcting system and operational processes such that borrower payments are accurately applied according to the terms of the Interest Rate Step-Ups in the Modification Agreement. Interest Rate Step-up Notices:** Servicers are required to send two notices of an Interest Rate Step-Up to the borrower prior to the Step Payment Effective Date. The first notice must be sent at least 120 calendar days, but no more than 240 calendar days, before the initial payment is due at the adjusted level. An additional notice must be sent 60-75 days before the initial payment is due at the adjusted level. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where the notices were not sent within the required timeframes and/or did not include the required elements. For Interest Rate Step-Up Notice results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to, correcting system and operational processes such that Interest Rate Step-Up Notices are sent within the required timeframes and updating notice templates to ensure that all required information is included in the Interest Rate Step-Up Notices sent to the borrower. Permanent modifications on which homeowners lose good standing are subsequently disqualified from the program. This metric * Two previously reported metrics, Second Look % Disagree and Second Look % Unable to Determine were combined into this new metric effective Q2 2015. ** New metric effective Q2 2015. 27 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Second Quarter 2015 Appendix 2: Terms and Methodologies Average Delinquency at Trial Start: 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. Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio: 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. Disqualification: A permanent modification disqualifies from HAMP when the borrower has missed the equivalent of three full monthly payments. Once disqualified, the borrower is no longer eligible to receive HAMP incentives. However, the terms of the permanent modification remain the same, and the servicer will continue to work with the borrower to cure the delinquency or identify other loss mitigation options. Servicers are required to report monthly payment information on HAMP modifications in the form of an Official Monthly Report (OMR). If a servicer does not report an OMR for a loan in a given month, the performance of that loan is not included in official Treasury reporting for that month. In addition, reported loan counts may shift from prior reports due to servicer data corrections. Eligible Loans: Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before January 1, 2009; excludes loans with current unpaid principal balances greater than current conforming loan limits-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; 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. Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio: Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo fees) to monthly gross income. Median Monthly Housing Payment: Principal and interest payment. Before modification payment is homeowner’s current payment at time of evaluation.t modifications on which homeowners lose good standing are subsequently disqualified from the program. This metric 28 Appendix 3: Compliance Criteria Tested Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Criteria Tested Review Type Second Look Directed Actions Objective Servicer appropriately solicited borrowers for HAMP and that the servicer met the reasonable efforts requirements Second Lien Solicitation Second Look Servicer has solicited borrowers with second liens for which a HAMP modification exists on the first lien Initial Packages sent after Right Party Contact (RPC) Second Look Servicer sent potentially eligible borrowers HAMP packages following RPC Timely SPOC Assignment Second Look Servicer assigned a Single Point of Contact and sent a SPOC assignment letter to potentially eligible borrowers following RPC HAMP Solicitation Content of Borrower Notices Second Look Borrower Notices contained required information Timely Acknowledgement Letter sent Second Look Upon receiving any part of a HAMP package, servicer sent an Acknowledgement Letter to the borrower within the required time frame Accuracy of Incomplete Information Notice (IIN) sent, Second Look where applicable Upon receiving part of a HAMP Package but not all required information, servicer sent an Incomplete Information Notice to the borrower listing documentation still needed Timely mailing of IIN, where applicable Second Look Servicer sent Incomplete Information Notices within required time frame Validation of Tier 1 Denials Second Look Denials of Tier 1 HAMP modifications are valid Validation of Tier 2 Denials Second Look Denials of Tier 2 HAMP modifications are valid Second Lien Denials Second Look Denials of second lien modifications are valid Non-Approval Notice Second Look Servicer included correct denial reason in Non-Approval Notice and sent within 10 days of decision Denial Reporting Second Look Servicer reported correct denial reason to the HAMP Program Administrator Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Criteria Tested Review Type Objective Dodd Frank Certification Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer Obtained a signed Dodd-Frank Certification from borrowers receiving a HAMP modification Accurate occupancy status Core Eligibility/Incentive Borrower occupancy status in the HAMP system of record is accurate Origination date Core Eligibility/Incentive Origination date of the mortgage is prior to January 1, 2009 Unpaid Principal Balance Core Eligibility/Incentive Pre-modification unpaid principal balance does not exceed program limits Completed Request for Mortgage Assistance or Hardship Affidavit Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer obtained a signed Request for Mortgage Assistance or Hardship Affidavit Approval Decision Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer made correct decision to approve the modification 29 Appendix 3: Compliance Criteria Tested Completeness of full underwriting package Second Look, Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer obtained a completed package to underwrite modification Accuracy of Income calculation Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer correctly calculated borrower income Accurate HAMP Eligibility decision (approvals) Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer made correct decision to approve the modification Accurate HAMP Underwriting Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer correctly underwrote the modification to ensure correct payment terms Accurate Escrow Analysis Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer performed accurate analysis of borrower escrow to use in modification Property Valuation (AVM, BPO) obtained Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer obtained appraisal or broker price opinion for the property Accuracy of Trial Period Plan (TPP) Notice Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer sent accurate TPP Notices to borrowers entering a Trial modification Application of TPP payments Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately applied borrower TPP payments Re-Default and Loss of Good Standing Directed Actions, Core Eligibility/Incentive Modifications that are disqualified from HAMP due to Loss of Good Standing or canceled from TPP are done so accurately and in a timely manner NPV model use/re-coding compliance Net Present Value Servicer NPV models provide accurate results consistent with the Treasury NPV model Accuracy of NPV inputs Net Present Value Servicer input accurate data into the NPV model Accuracy of Permanent Modification Agreement Core Eligibility/Incentive Permanent Modification Agreement includes correct terms including payment amount, interest rate, unpaid principal balance, and forbearance amount Waiver of Late Charges & other Fees at conversion from Core Eligibility/Incentive TPP to Perm. Mod. At time of conversion to permanent modification, servicer waived all late charges and other fees related to the delinquency of the original loan Application of Unapplied Funds at end of TPP Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately applied payment amounts held in suspense at end of Trial Plan Accurate 2MP Eligibility Assessment Second Look, Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately evaluated borrower for second lien modification Accurate calculation of 2MP TPP/Modification Terms Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately calculates second lien modification terms Timely mailing and accuracy of 2MP Non-Approval Notice, Second Look where applicable Servicer sent accurate Non-Approval Notices for denied second lien modifications within specified time frame Accurate HAFA Eligibility Assessment Second Look, Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer reviewed HAFA applications and makes appropriate eligibility decision HAFA - Release of Liens Core Eligibility/Incentive servicer obtained release of all liens on properties completing a HAFA short sale or deed-in-lieu Escalated Cases Directed Actions Servicer timely and accurately resolved escalated case complaints 30 Appendix 3: Compliance Criteria Tested Solicitation of Financial counseling notices Core Eligibility/Incentive Timely mailing of 2MP TPPs Core Eligibility/Incentive Timely mailing of HAFA Short Core Eligibility/Incentive Sale notices Servicer considered borrower for financial counseling by sending a notification with the TPP Servicer sent 2MP TPP’s within the required timeframe Servicer sent HAFA Short Sale Notices within the required timeframe Program Management and Reporting Criteria Tested Review Type Objective HAMP Incentive Compensation - Servicer, Borrower & Investor Core Eligibility/Incentive Incentive compensation is accurate based on loan file documentation Application of Borrower Incentives Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately applied borrower incentives to unpaid principal balance within 30 days of receipt Timely and accurate 120-Day Notice of Interest Rate Core Eligibility/Incentive Increase Servicer sent accurate first notice of Interest Rate Increase between 120 and 240 days prior to rate increase Timely and accurate 60-Day Notice of Interest Rate Increase Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer sent accurate second notice of Interest Rate Increase between 60 and 75 days prior to rate increase Accuracy of step rate increases Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately calculated and implemented HAMP rate increases Appropriate timing on reporting of denial to IR2 (i.e. Second Look at least 30 days after letter sent) Servicer reported HAMP denials to the Program Administrator in accordance with program guidelines Accurate reporting of HAMP Trials/Perm Mods to IR2 Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately reported modification information to the Program Administrator including all data used in calculating incentives Appropriate notification to borrowers of PostModification Counseling Core Eligibility/Incentive Borrowers entering Trial Period Plans are notified of the availability of financial counseling 2MP Incentive Compensation Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer, Borrower & Investor Incentive compensation for second lien modifications is accurate Accurate reporting of 2MP Trials/Perm Mods to IR2 Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer reported accurate modification data to Program Administrator with respect to second lien modifications HAFA Incentive Compensation - Servicer, Borrower & Investor Core Eligibility/Incentive Incentive compensation for HAFA transactions is accurate based on loan file documentation Accuracy of reporting of HAFA activity to IR2 Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer reported accurate modification data to Program Administrator with respect to HAFA short sale and deed-in-lieu transactions Re-default and Loss of Good Standing Directed Actions, Core Eligibility/Incentive Modifications that are disqualified from HAMP due to Loss of Good Standing or canceled from TPP are done so accurately and in a timely manner 31 Appendix 3: Compliance Criteria Tested Pre-Foreclosure affirmation provided by Relationship Manager (SPOC) Directed Actions SPOC provided affirmation that all available loss mitigation options had been exhausted Accuracy of Foreclosure Referrals Directed Actions Foreclosure referrals meet the requirements of the MHA Handbook Certification provided to Foreclosure attorney Directed Actions Servicer provided certification that HAMP modification had been explored and all other loss mitigation options had been exhausted Proper resolution of Escalated Directed Actions Cases Borrower complaints are resolved accurately Timely processing of escalated cases Directed Actions Borrower complaints are resolved within prescribed time period or the borrower is notified appropriately of delays Validation of receipt and completeness of MHA Data for transferred loans by transferee servicer Transfer Testing Within 60 days of transfer, the transferee servicer validated the acquired loans contained all required MHA data Timely processing of Transfer Testing transferred Trial Period Plans Borrowers in Trial Period Plans as of the date of transfer were appropriately placed into Official Modifications Application of incentives for transferred modifications Borrower incentives were applied correctly to unpaid principal balance of transferred loans where appropriate Transfer Testing 32 Appendix 4: End Notes Note # Section End Notes HAMP As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes Treasury FHA-HAMP modifications. Totals reflect impact of servicing transfers. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. HAMP Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through the end of the month and reflects the status of homeowners as of that date; 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. Excludes cancellations and disqualifications pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios. 3 HAMP Servicers did not submit 1.9% of the total required OMRs for loans aged up to 60 months in the current reporting period. In addition, reported loan counts may shift from prior reports due to servicer data corrections. For example, if it was assumed that all unreported OMRs reflect either a current payment status or the maximum number of missed payments based on the most recently submitted OMR, the re-default rate for Tier 1 permanent modifications that have aged 60 months may range between 46.1% and 46.4%. 4 Other MHA Programs 5 Other MHA Programs 6 Other MHA Programs 1 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. Principal amount reduced as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization. 7 Other MHA Programs Survey data indicates that program to date, 355,626 qualifying first lien modifications have been matched with a second lien. Of these matched second liens, approximately 53% are found to be ineligible for a 2MP modification. The most common reasons for ineligibility are: cancellation or failure of a trial or permanent first lien HAMP modification; extinguishment of the second lien prior to evaluation for 2MP; failure of a 2MP trial modification; and some homeowners with eligible second liens decline to participate in 2MP. 8 Servicer 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. 9 Servicer Includes non-GSE activity under the MHA program only. Servicer GSE program data not available. Servicer These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to permanent modifications, but not reported as such in the HAMP system of record. Additionally, servicers may process cancellations of permanent modifications for reasons, including but not limited to, data corrections, loan repurchase agreements, etc. 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 reporting periods. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, these modifications are reported as Active Trials. These modifications may be 6 months or more beyond their first trial payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trials. As a result, fluctuations are expected in this population. 10 33 Appendix 5: HAMP Activity by State State Trial Modifications Started AK AL AR AZ CA CO CT DC DE FL GA HI IA ID IL IN KS KY LA MA MD ME MI MN MO MS MT NC ND NE NH NJ NM NV NY OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VA VT WA WI WV WY PR Nationwide* * Includes U.S. Territories 1,254 16,607 6,498 91,609 499,571 31,389 32,198 4,190 7,753 290,359 89,578 8,502 7,084 8,713 121,807 25,960 6,888 10,651 16,355 53,570 76,452 6,853 70,021 36,590 27,454 10,180 2,832 48,427 478 3,810 10,307 82,407 8,466 53,358 119,404 58,273 7,510 25,815 58,481 11,158 25,379 1,027 28,749 80,180 19,029 55,266 2,039 47,973 23,926 3,629 1,209 5,803 2,343,069 Permanent Modifications Started Median Monthly Payment Reduction 712 9,972 3,773 54,408 343,297 19,936 21,659 2,657 5,068 186,550 55,305 5,638 4,111 5,405 80,201 16,045 4,017 6,546 10,143 36,486 50,408 4,679 43,059 22,716 16,555 6,319 1,643 29,867 249 2,342 6,911 54,738 5,272 32,679 80,032 34,346 4,276 16,378 37,545 7,665 15,411 565 17,981 46,271 12,277 35,055 1,440 31,776 15,415 2,151 738 4,576 1,513,295 $479.17 $261.52 $246.74 $440.81 $712.11 $406.51 $526.60 $544.76 $407.66 $468.21 $358.48 $793.80 $250.07 $368.39 $502.49 $260.03 $286.78 $264.85 $281.06 $578.46 $563.87 $385.30 $341.51 $418.61 $291.47 $250.51 $396.16 $301.70 $273.66 $260.09 $464.91 $626.88 $345.32 $525.22 $781.27 $289.83 $246.01 $454.20 $342.72 $535.01 $296.14 $259.65 $284.86 $282.23 $428.67 $481.86 $364.69 $502.72 $344.33 $304.27 $362.42 $286.92 $483.05 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 31% 32% 32% 37% 37% 33% 37% 32% 32% 40% 36% 34% 32% 33% 40% 33% 33% 33% 33% 35% 34% 35% 37% 35% 34% 33% 32% 33% 31% 33% 34% 37% 33% 38% 39% 36% 33% 34% 33% 39% 33% 29% 34% 33% 32% 32% 33% 33% 36% 30% 30% 37% 35% 34 Appendix 6: HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State Median Values State AK Before Mod DTI 44.98% Pre-Mod Interest Rate 6.8% Pre-Mod Monthly P&I $1,463.03 Monthly Income at Time of Mod $4,166.67 After Mod UPB $213,368.59 Monthly P&I Total Monthly Final Monthly P&I Payment P&I Payment After Mod Payment Increase at Increase after All Reduction from Monthly P&I First Interest Increases Pre-Mod P&I Rate Increase $856.88 $93.19 $178.31 -$409.31 AL 46.45% 6.8% $869.56 $2,281.06 $119,673.47 $507.92 $48.19 $98.45 -$230.04 AR 45.52% 6.6% $801.46 $2,125.91 $114,542.82 $468.31 $48.77 $100.76 -$201.76 AZ 49.40% 6.4% $1,191.87 $2,806.00 $178,237.00 $668.76 $79.30 $193.26 -$293.15 CA 48.67% 6.1% $1,942.63 $4,680.00 $306,804.74 $1,091.93 $138.32 $317.44 -$440.48 CO 46.38% 6.4% $1,236.53 $3,191.80 $189,102.57 $751.23 $81.39 $181.07 -$282.27 CT 45.41% 6.5% $1,457.49 $4,333.33 $210,563.94 $801.64 $92.68 $203.41 -$389.19 DC 47.92% 6.4% $1,709.01 $4,113.95 $275,123.22 $988.98 $122.33 $269.53 -$373.56 DE 47.03% 6.5% $1,282.25 $3,098.73 $195,324.72 $759.20 $83.61 $175.74 -$302.61 FL 47.57% 6.5% $1,191.82 $3,276.16 $170,680.78 $628.68 $76.01 $171.60 -$334.57 GA 47.37% 6.5% $1,004.68 $2,642.70 $143,703.42 $568.64 $62.32 $140.10 -$270.62 HI 49.04% 6.3% $2,416.78 $5,367.97 $392,422.21 $1,395.51 $175.90 $382.47 -$494.67 IA 44.34% 6.6% $777.68 $2,300.00 $108,438.05 $435.65 $45.46 $95.00 -$203.11 ID 48.53% 6.5% $1,146.06 $2,721.42 $170,552.92 $667.10 $74.61 $165.93 -$276.43 IL 46.94% 6.5% $1,279.73 $3,716.66 $179,223.41 $658.59 $79.82 $181.24 -$373.92 IN 46.02% 6.8% $817.31 $2,162.50 $110,200.57 $462.46 $45.52 $96.32 -$216.33 KS 44.52% 6.6% $894.41 $2,711.56 $125,497.10 $504.13 $51.69 $111.60 -$236.19 KY 45.52% 6.8% $805.92 $2,205.60 $111,681.43 $465.49 $46.66 $97.69 -$210.95 LA 45.48% 6.9% $897.08 $2,563.87 $124,175.18 $506.36 $51.58 $103.76 -$248.29 MA 47.01% 6.4% $1,660.75 $4,336.15 $250,000.00 $937.21 $110.16 $244.92 -$404.65 MD 46.83% 6.4% $1,667.67 $4,325.78 $258,879.28 $956.10 $114.98 $256.32 -$389.52 ME 46.41% 6.6% $1,139.15 $3,029.36 $164,464.02 $637.54 $71.32 $145.67 -$290.87 MI 46.85% 6.5% $956.38 $2,671.00 $129,972.48 $520.36 $55.46 $126.73 -$263.49 MN 46.09% 6.3% $1,204.65 $3,298.00 $178,757.23 $692.50 $77.82 $179.12 -$295.79 MO 45.93% 6.6% $881.01 $2,484.00 $123,679.01 $494.34 $52.12 $110.14 -$241.18 MS 46.29% 6.9% $812.64 $2,225.00 $110,679.67 $454.36 $45.13 $90.82 -$231.17 MT 46.79% 6.4% $1,266.83 $3,256.55 $193,522.27 $741.12 $81.96 $172.74 -$303.01 NC 46.29% 6.5% $950.14 $2,515.02 $134,519.84 $551.03 $57.14 $119.04 -$245.26 ND 42.10% 6.6% $882.50 $2,839.91 $135,117.50 $544.00 $56.31 $118.03 -$192.94 NE 43.78% 6.7% $780.16 $2,489.49 $109,518.57 $460.05 $45.25 $93.69 -$213.12 NH 43.89% 6.4% $1,348.06 $4,159.66 $198,831.86 $772.33 $85.82 $183.36 -$332.98 35 Appendix 6: HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State Median Values State Before Mod DTI Pre-Mod Interest Rate Pre-Mod Monthly P&I Monthly Income at Time of Mod After Mod UPB Monthly P&I Total Monthly Final Monthly P&I Payment P&I Payment After Mod Payment Increase at Increase after All Reduction from Monthly P&I First Interest Increases Pre-Mod P&I Rate Increase NJ 45.23% 6.4% $1,706.83 $5,237.25 $250,529.64 $905.50 $111.58 $242.47 -$450.41 NM 47.10% 6.5% $1,057.51 $2,742.81 $156,270.04 $626.21 $67.91 $145.77 -$273.20 NV 50.06% 6.3% $1,369.52 $3,129.75 $207,680.17 $757.65 $92.89 $221.39 -$340.15 NY 47.14% 6.4% $2,082.53 $5,691.31 $311,746.54 $1,111.08 $139.98 $304.13 -$549.46 OH 45.38% 6.6% $821.63 $2,397.50 $111,035.52 $458.14 $46.37 $102.61 -$223.11 OK 44.68% 6.9% $777.38 $2,380.05 $106,952.55 $448.36 $43.41 $89.26 -$216.93 OR 46.62% 6.4% $1,323.80 $3,455.80 $206,607.34 $782.86 $91.44 $199.97 -$312.40 PA 45.16% 6.6% $1,088.73 $3,200.00 $152,225.28 $602.39 $64.79 $132.70 -$286.24 RI 47.47% 6.4% $1,363.71 $3,662.45 $196,945.15 $733.92 $87.38 $199.14 -$375.95 SC 46.67% 6.6% $960.76 $2,495.63 $136,959.35 $555.56 $58.01 $122.52 -$244.84 SD 44.25% 6.5% $949.05 $2,720.99 $136,834.86 $528.82 $57.55 $128.11 -$213.59 TN 46.92% 6.9% $880.27 $2,310.16 $119,127.96 $496.88 $49.14 $102.90 -$248.97 TX 43.15% 7.0% $859.86 $2,958.00 $118,760.74 $498.64 $49.48 $101.37 -$237.61 UT 47.50% 6.5% $1,368.20 $3,279.61 $211,248.77 $812.83 $93.41 $210.59 -$309.10 VA 46.62% 6.4% $1,591.92 $4,055.00 $248,613.71 $923.28 $109.10 $242.89 -$334.37 VT 45.99% 6.8% $1,129.60 $3,115.37 $165,660.64 $630.32 $72.12 $154.83 -$294.80 WA 46.44% 6.4% $1,512.27 $3,972.22 $241,149.09 $888.37 $107.21 $232.69 -$337.72 WI 45.10% 6.5% $986.26 $2,991.67 $138,396.36 $545.47 $59.34 $127.78 -$268.62 WV 46.51% 6.6% $1,085.09 $2,682.73 $155,013.29 $629.99 $63.44 $127.81 -$254.33 WY 46.15% 6.5% $1,306.74 $3,223.00 $188,645.47 $804.54 $80.03 $167.27 -$298.39 PR 50.88% 6.4% $772.20 $1,650.00 $103,665.69 $444.34 $44.22 $95.69 -$212.71 Nationwide* 47.27% 6.4% $1,444.08 $3,799.00 $214,358.36 $797.69 $94.47 $210.43 -$349.24 * Includes U.S. Territories 36 Appendix 7: Performance of HAMP Modifications by Vintage HAMP Tier 1 Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 3 Mod. Effective in: 6 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 2009Q3 3,575 10.7% 2009Q4 43,621 5.7% 2010Q1 123,861 4.3% 2010Q2 147,507 2010Q3 86,183 2010Q4 58,008 2011Q1 70,803 2011Q2 12 18 # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 4.5% 4,406 15.9% 1.9% 47,454 10.2% 10.7% 4,624 26.0% 6.3% 51,346 20.4% 21.3% 4,953 32.4% 29.1% 15.9% 54,533 25.5% 1.5% 150,120 10.4% 6.1% 160,992 20.4% 22.4% 16.1% 165,998 26.0% 22.4% 5.3% 1.8% 157,113 12.3% 7.5% 173,387 19.5% 16.1% 170,571 27.7% 24.1% 5.1% 1.9% 95,876 11.1% 7.1% 104,151 18.2% 14.5% 106,118 25.3% 21.9% 4.6% 1.8% 62,486 8.9% 5.7% 65,108 18.4% 14.5% 66,657 24.0% 21.1% 2.9% 1.1% 75,819 8.2% 5.1% 79,520 17.0% 13.6% 81,098 22.2% 19.2% 79,804 3.7% 1.3% 89,058 9.4% 5.8% 92,536 16.2% 13.2% 91,808 23.1% 20.1% 2011Q3 80,804 3.7% 1.3% 85,865 8.8% 5.6% 86,831 15.6% 12.3% 86,571 21.8% 18.9% 2011Q4 64,854 3.4% 1.2% 67,371 6.9% 4.4% 67,698 14.7% 11.4% 67,848 19.3% 16.8% 2012Q1 49,264 2.5% 0.9% 50,706 6.8% 4.1% 50,729 14.1% 10.9% 50,122 18.5% 15.8% 2012Q2 43,895 3.0% 1.0% 44,872 7.7% 4.6% 45,151 13.6% 10.9% 44,671 18.9% 16.1% 2012Q3 47,201 3.1% 1.0% 48,874 7.3% 4.6% 49,610 13.0% 10.1% 50,141 17.9% 15.1% 2012Q4 39,217 3.2% 1.0% 41,127 6.3% 3.9% 42,347 12.3% 9.4% 42,611 16.3% 14.0% 2013Q1 39,178 2.2% 0.7% 40,832 6.0% 3.5% 41,953 12.6% 9.6% 42,330 16.6% 13.9% 2013Q2 31,482 2.6% 0.8% 32,956 6.5% 3.9% 33,659 11.8% 9.4% 33,936 16.5% 14.1% 2013Q3 31,880 2.9% 1.0% 33,355 7.0% 4.2% 34,752 12.1% 9.2% 34,553 16.4% 14.0% 2013Q4 27,259 2.9% 1.0% 28,578 6.3% 3.8% 29,861 12.3% 9.5% 29,844 16.0% 13.8% 2014Q1 23,659 2.5% 0.9% 25,549 6.8% 3.9% 26,389 13.1% 10.3% 8,604 15.8% 13.6% 2014Q2 18,999 3.7% 1.1% 19,813 7.8% 5.1% 20,434 13.0% 10.7% 2014Q3 16,977 3.6% 1.3% 17,809 8.0% 5.4% 6,222 12.4% 9.8% 2014Q4 15,136 3.9% 1.5% 16,894 7.1% 4.4% 2015Q1 14,846 2.9% 0.9% 5,529 7.3% 4.3% 2015Q2 5,078 3.5% 1.2% All 1,163,091 3.9% 1.3% 1,242,462 9.0% 5.5% 1,267,300 16.6% 13.2% 1,232,967 22.6% 19.5% Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 24 Mod. Effective in: # 60+ Days 36 90+ Days # 60+ Days 48 90+ Days # 60+ Days 60 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 2009Q3 5,056 37.0% 33.7% 5,155 44.1% 41.9% 5,063 50.3% 48.7% 5,048 54.3% 52.7% 2009Q4 55,488 31.6% 28.5% 56,307 39.7% 37.2% 56,078 45.0% 43.2% 55,341 48.9% 47.5% 2010Q1 167,781 31.9% 28.7% 166,046 39.7% 37.4% 165,819 44.6% 42.9% 163,415 48.4% 47.2% 2010Q2 178,681 31.0% 28.7% 174,891 39.2% 37.4% 174,249 43.7% 42.5% 173,072 47.1% 46.1% 2010Q3 106,169 29.5% 26.8% 104,438 37.1% 35.2% 105,057 41.2% 39.8% 41,261 44.8% 43.7% 2010Q4 66,419 29.6% 26.5% 65,932 36.3% 34.2% 65,961 40.4% 38.8% 438,137 47.7% 46.5% 2011Q1 80,744 27.6% 24.9% 80,896 33.8% 31.9% 80,443 37.9% 36.5% 2011Q2 91,385 27.3% 25.1% 91,462 33.2% 31.6% 90,960 37.1% 36.0% 2011Q3 85,052 25.8% 23.4% 86,800 31.0% 29.2% 30,427 36.5% 35.4% 2011Q4 67,578 23.4% 21.0% 67,678 28.5% 26.8% 26.0% 774,057 41.8% 40.3% 2012Q1 50,629 22.5% 20.0% 50,176 27.9% 2012Q2 44,878 22.1% 20.0% 44,800 27.0% 25.5% 2012Q3 50,409 20.9% 18.6% 16,840 26.0% 24.5% 1,011,421 35.2% 33.3% 2012Q4 42,741 19.9% 17.6% 2013Q1 42,104 19.9% 17.6% 2013Q2 34,066 19.0% 17.2% 2013Q3 11,096 19.3% 17.4% 1,180,276 27.2% 24.7% 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 All 37 Appendix 7: Performance of HAMP Modifications by Vintage HAMP Tier 2 Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 3 Mod. Effective in: # 60+ Days 6 90+ Days # 60+ Days 12 90+ Days # 60+ Days 18 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 100.0% 2012Q3 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 2012Q4 946 5.4% 1.4% 1,113 9.7% 5.3% 1,177 22.9% 16.6% 1,232 27.2% 22.2% 2013Q1 2,479 4.2% 1.3% 2,700 11.9% 6.5% 2,826 23.5% 17.9% 2,907 29.3% 24.9% 2013Q2 4,102 5.3% 1.5% 4,454 13.8% 7.9% 5,049 21.8% 17.3% 5,151 29.1% 24.5% 2013Q3 11,194 5.9% 2.0% 13,206 13.8% 8.2% 13,623 22.2% 16.7% 13,515 28.9% 24.7% 2013Q4 11,223 5.9% 1.9% 11,791 11.8% 7.2% 12,598 22.1% 17.0% 12,482 26.6% 23.1% 2014Q1 10,519 4.2% 1.4% 11,622 12.2% 6.7% 12,031 21.5% 16.9% 3,896 26.8% 22.9% 2014Q2 10,899 5.5% 1.5% 11,206 12.9% 7.3% 11,311 19.8% 15.6% 2014Q3 9,204 5.8% 2.0% 9,520 12.7% 7.9% 3,572 19.9% 15.0% 2014Q4 11,108 5.7% 1.8% 12,730 11.1% 6.2% 2015Q1 13,136 4.5% 1.2% 5,099 10.7% 5.6% 2015Q2 4,527 4.8% 1.1% All 89,337 5.3% 1.6% 83,441 12.3% 7.1% 62,187 21.5% 16.6% 39,184 28.0% 23.9% Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 24 Mod. Effective in: 36 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 2012Q3 1 100.0% 100.0% 2012Q4 1,241 32.4% 27.6% 2013Q1 2,924 33.8% 30.2% 2013Q2 5,184 32.2% 28.9% 2013Q3 3,701 29.8% 26.6% 13,051 31.9% 28.4% # 60+ Days 48 90+ Days # 60+ Days 60 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 All Loan payment status is not reported by servicers after program disqualification (90+ days delinquent). Therefore, 90+ days delinquent loans are included in each of the 60+ and 90+ days delinquent metrics for all future reporting periods, even though some loans may have cured or paid off following program disqualification. In addition, once a loan is reported as paid off it is no longer reflected in future periods. 38 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Abilene, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Aguadilla-Isabela, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Akron, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Albany, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Albany, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Altoona, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Amarillo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Ames, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Anchorage, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area Anderson, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Anderson, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Ann Arbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Anniston-Oxford-Jacksonville, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Appleton, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Arecibo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Asheville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Athens-Clarke County, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Auburn-Opelika, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Austin-Round Rock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Bakersfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Bangor, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Barnstable Town, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Baton Rouge, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Battle Creek, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Bay City, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Beckley, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Bellingham, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Bend-Redmond, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Billings, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Binghamton, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Birmingham-Hoover, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Bismarck, ND Metropolitan Statistical Area Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radford, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Bloomington, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Bloomington, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Bloomington-Normal, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Bloomsburg-Berwick, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Boise City, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Boulder, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Bowling Green, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Brunswick, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 72 188 2,638 331 236 1,822 3,452 172 4,309 150 145 65 550 114 208 1,214 188 375 147 1,341 566 43,870 2,497 266 1,031 2,883 8,231 16,882 387 1,852 2,421 442 281 352 66 624 1,264 157 271 3,725 52 182 157 224 68 45 3,035 25,439 652 180 995 6,702 568 264 1,650 434 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $187.20 $251.87 $300.42 $242.64 $349.04 $359.63 $333.47 $243.54 $400.59 $218.73 $259.80 $279.04 $511.05 $180.26 $214.23 $420.54 $214.91 $305.40 $262.06 $352.52 $306.59 $377.19 $492.69 $286.68 $262.71 $330.50 $475.06 $471.70 $306.34 $612.93 $263.28 $266.77 $230.29 $218.29 $215.00 $479.13 $527.24 $288.99 $248.02 $280.88 $338.36 $299.30 $348.21 $257.42 $202.45 $220.88 $383.27 $625.61 $481.35 $243.98 $470.79 $706.90 $234.38 $328.16 $260.11 $260.60 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 32% 36% 37% 31% 34% 34% 33% 30% 34% 31% 36% 32% 33% 27% 26% 36% 30% 34% 36% 33% 34% 37% 38% 29% 33% 33% 37% 32% 34% 36% 31% 38% 35% 33% 35% 34% 37% 27% 36% 32% 34% 30% 41% 30% 24% 34% 34% 36% 34% 34% 31% 40% 35% 33% 35% 32% 39 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan Statistical Area California-Lexington Park, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Canton-Massillon, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Carbondale-Marion, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Carson City, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Casper, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area Cedar Rapids, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Chambersburg-Waynesboro, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Champaign-Urbana, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Charleston, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Charlottesville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Chattanooga, TN-GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Cheyenne, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Chico, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Clarksville, TN-KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland-Elyria, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Coeur d'Alene, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area College Station-Bryan, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Colorado Springs, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbia, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, GA-AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Corpus Christi, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Corvallis, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-Destin, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Cumberland, MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Dalton, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Danville, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Danville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Dayton, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Decatur, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Decatur, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Dothan, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Dover, DE Metropolitan Statistical Area Dubuque, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Duluth, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area East Stroudsburg, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Eau Claire, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area El Centro, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 440 343 1,303 5,209 113 57 406 132 346 258 214 173 3,155 10,099 629 1,446 147 77,369 1,156 6,248 264 236 8,683 670 133 2,089 173 2,647 773 126 5,589 392 110 868 147 15,565 502 61 53 398 583 2,131 188 100 5,819 12,191 1,483 25,429 193 928 111 698 1,392 1,251 246 1,519 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $420.03 $562.18 $263.68 $475.51 $231.07 $265.86 $525.09 $345.85 $252.35 $345.84 $244.54 $219.18 $353.01 $315.16 $390.86 $275.31 $276.06 $514.46 $456.58 $309.44 $221.09 $256.26 $307.17 $414.03 $220.10 $390.74 $244.41 $267.45 $272.68 $202.80 $321.32 $247.71 $347.65 $422.33 $246.67 $297.94 $261.01 $208.42 $172.03 $352.98 $243.28 $263.00 $230.60 $206.32 $392.02 $407.47 $274.05 $376.48 $217.68 $398.17 $266.07 $284.63 $322.44 $493.36 $287.35 $437.68 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 35% 32% 35% 40% 31% 44% 37% 29% 32% 32% 31% 32% 33% 33% 31% 34% 27% 41% 34% 35% 30% 32% 37% 33% 27% 33% 32% 32% 33% 29% 36% 32% 26% 36% 32% 33% 35% 39% 23% 35% 36% 36% 29% 35% 38% 33% 32% 39% 31% 30% 37% 33% 34% 41% 32% 35% 40 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Elizabethtown-Fort Knox, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Elkhart-Goshen, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Elmira, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Erie, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Eugene, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Evansville, IN-KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Fairbanks, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area Fajardo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Fargo, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Farmington, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Flagstaff, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Flint, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Florence, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Fond du Lac, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Fort Collins, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Fort Smith, AR-OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Fort Wayne, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Fresno, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Gadsden, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Gainesville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Gainesville, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Gettysburg, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Glens Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Forks, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Island, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Junction, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Grants Pass, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Great Falls, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Green Bay, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Greensboro-High Point, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Greenville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Guayama, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Gulfport-Biloxi-Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Hammond, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Harrisonburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Hattiesburg, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Hilton Head Island-Bluffton-Beaufort, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Hinesville, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Holland-Grand Haven, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Homosassa Springs, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area Hot Springs, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Houma-Thibodaux, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 1,350 143 617 118 391 1,193 444 67 15 183 119 671 1,235 329 1,824 511 155 174 875 252 905 8,868 177 720 1,145 252 367 172 63 35 576 3,038 332 78 1,118 597 2,600 369 2,251 42 764 1,651 218 927 1,149 254 5,764 242 1,070 592 126 238 445 786 146 273 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $247.90 $240.05 $257.50 $260.59 $239.59 $392.03 $209.25 $372.60 $208.03 $278.07 $290.47 $237.45 $286.41 $530.03 $324.02 $226.08 $213.49 $291.81 $407.10 $208.81 $241.33 $480.59 $222.75 $334.68 $331.39 $443.17 $329.66 $239.14 $228.97 $241.89 $415.44 $286.75 $536.31 $259.62 $358.20 $346.02 $284.59 $274.11 $265.45 $177.46 $275.96 $427.52 $296.64 $424.50 $310.67 $407.98 $454.17 $236.68 $243.85 $521.63 $253.44 $256.51 $364.41 $640.20 $315.46 $240.08 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 33% 30% 33% 39% 38% 33% 31% 26% 27% 31% 26% 34% 33% 34% 37% 32% 34% 34% 31% 30% 35% 37% 30% 35% 36% 36% 36% 33% 30% 34% 33% 34% 40% 29% 30% 38% 33% 33% 32% 34% 35% 32% 35% 34% 32% 35% 36% 32% 31% 42% 32% 27% 42% 26% 36% 31% 41 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Huntsville, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Idaho Falls, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Iowa City, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Ithaca, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Jackson, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Jackson, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Jacksonville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Jacksonville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Janesville-Beloit, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Jefferson City, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Johnson City, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Johnstown, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Jonesboro, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Joplin, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Kahului-Wailuku-Lahaina, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area Kalamazoo-Portage, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Kankakee, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Kansas City, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Kennewick-Richland, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Killeen-Temple, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN-VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Kingston, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Knoxville, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Kokomo, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area La Crosse-Onalaska, WI-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Lafayette, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Lafayette, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lafayette-West Lafayette, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Lake Charles, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Lancaster, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lansing-East Lansing, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Laredo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Las Cruces, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Lawrence, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Lawton, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Lebanon, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lewiston, ID-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Lexington-Fayette, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Lima, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Lincoln, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Logan, UT-ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Longview, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Longview, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Lubbock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 16,690 319 654 305 5,582 106 53 636 1,759 310 10,233 172 590 157 263 108 81 242 905 869 439 5,978 373 274 363 983 1,806 233 149 81 595 173 279 1,284 4,546 1,124 1,559 527 358 26,794 161 102 266 97 339 830 208 376 1,177 212 145 424 84,746 23,617 3,282 171 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $285.34 $234.88 $238.73 $262.63 $275.72 $312.17 $343.54 $285.83 $250.47 $236.25 $371.44 $258.27 $264.05 $211.37 $251.91 $222.99 $242.10 $199.60 $1,058.95 $305.70 $343.96 $311.79 $272.83 $218.20 $237.73 $503.99 $264.42 $222.10 $263.54 $207.52 $239.39 $283.07 $232.72 $408.03 $368.94 $306.45 $314.60 $287.49 $325.30 $527.45 $319.99 $214.03 $296.66 $269.66 $334.68 $297.53 $252.38 $260.80 $244.48 $319.71 $221.17 $376.63 $845.21 $677.22 $266.65 $227.99 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 34% 34% 30% 26% 32% 32% 34% 36% 32% 34% 35% 28% 34% 30% 32% 32% 32% 31% 40% 37% 36% 34% 31% 29% 33% 38% 31% 33% 29% 25% 30% 37% 32% 36% 36% 30% 36% 36% 30% 38% 32% 33% 30% 26% 34% 34% 40% 32% 31% 28% 32% 33% 40% 31% 33% 31% 42 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lynchburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Macon, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Madera, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Madison, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Manchester-Nashua, NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Manhattan, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Mankato-North Mankato, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Mansfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Mayaguez, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Medford, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Memphis, TN-MS-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Merced, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Midland, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Midland, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Missoula, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Mobile, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Modesto, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Monroe, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Monroe, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Montgomery, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Morgantown, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Morristown, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Muncie, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Muskegon, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Napa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area New Bern, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area New Haven-Milford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area New Orleans-Metairie, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Niles-Benton Harbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Norwich-New London, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Ocala, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Ocean City, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Odessa, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Ogden-Clearfield, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Oklahoma City, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Olympia-Tumwater, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Oshkosh-Neenah, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Owensboro, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Palm Coast, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Panama City, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Parkersburg-Vienna, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 460 886 1,686 1,220 2,176 64 153 314 82 1,228 1,243 7,417 2,464 79,363 352 99 68 5,951 18,669 254 1,234 6,697 225 754 851 49 268 494 186 616 1,786 1,135 2,467 5,179 118 5,693 4,345 108,642 489 5,379 1,448 2,515 589 59 1,835 1,876 1,055 1,784 26,969 278 124 7,560 4,591 364 642 104 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $248.76 $279.23 $509.75 $394.42 $476.08 $330.37 $303.73 $237.93 $229.26 $250.77 $462.50 $296.78 $529.34 $542.23 $252.26 $279.46 $252.69 $356.99 $450.18 $410.55 $255.56 $565.81 $219.01 $354.54 $233.79 $384.61 $258.81 $506.12 $201.37 $244.76 $386.37 $834.06 $611.42 $311.88 $348.31 $476.13 $331.69 $805.05 $274.68 $473.29 $481.71 $359.55 $472.07 $205.41 $360.30 $258.49 $439.00 $272.21 $456.41 $277.74 $195.49 $837.76 $400.35 $334.05 $386.81 $184.53 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 28% 37% 38% 34% 33% 32% 30% 34% 38% 34% 35% 36% 37% 42% 33% 38% 29% 37% 36% 31% 35% 37% 28% 35% 29% 38% 32% 36% 32% 37% 36% 36% 42% 33% 42% 36% 35% 40% 34% 39% 37% 37% 33% 30% 29% 33% 32% 34% 39% 35% 32% 36% 38% 28% 36% 29% 43 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Peoria, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Pine Bluff, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Pittsburgh, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Pocatello, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Ponce, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Port St. Lucie, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Portland-South Portland, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Prescott, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Providence-Warwick, RI-MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Provo-Orem, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Pueblo, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Punta Gorda, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Racine, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Raleigh, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Rapid City, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area Reading, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Redding, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Reno, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Richmond, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Roanoke, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Rochester, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Rochester, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Rockford, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Rocky Mount, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Rome, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sacramento--Roseville--Arden-Arcade, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Saginaw, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Salem, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Salinas, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Salisbury, MD-DE Metropolitan Statistical Area Salt Lake City, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area San Angelo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area San Diego-Carlsbad, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area San German, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area San Juan-Carolina-Caguas, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles-Arroyo Grande, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sandusky, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Fe, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Maria-Santa Barbara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Rosa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Savannah, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Scranton--Wilkes-Barre--Hazleton, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 155 1,702 454 28,618 42,851 81 4,360 243 169 189 5,246 2,565 11,339 1,634 1,344 11,079 2,572 620 1,255 752 3,571 152 1,402 1,146 3,988 5,822 67,692 755 415 1,714 1,431 387 185 22,844 465 1,656 3,449 1,434 5,794 52 3,419 24,303 29,530 83 9,488 3,746 1,562 71 563 1,517 625 2,097 4,086 1,321 1,438 20,460 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $215.69 $307.11 $225.89 $398.99 $459.04 $213.64 $266.26 $329.84 $255.62 $241.81 $460.43 $444.73 $480.34 $497.21 $443.65 $535.61 $460.24 $264.67 $441.50 $355.81 $340.92 $322.53 $337.73 $448.55 $526.35 $367.96 $637.50 $274.27 $328.33 $264.19 $321.07 $246.04 $237.07 $610.50 $263.27 $383.99 $871.10 $422.68 $422.52 $182.47 $252.99 $761.36 $871.80 $236.24 $960.48 $299.04 $769.00 $217.31 $593.42 $978.54 $517.55 $771.72 $807.08 $320.87 $284.34 $558.84 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 26% 34% 34% 33% 37% 32% 35% 33% 31% 38% 39% 35% 35% 31% 36% 38% 32% 34% 41% 36% 32% 34% 33% 34% 36% 32% 37% 31% 33% 36% 37% 34% 31% 36% 36% 34% 40% 35% 33% 26% 32% 36% 38% 34% 37% 37% 36% 27% 30% 38% 35% 40% 37% 34% 36% 34% 44 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Sebring, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Sheboygan, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Sherman-Denison, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Shreveport-Bossier City, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sierra Vista-Douglas, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Sioux City, IA-NE-SD Metropolitan Statistical Area Sioux Falls, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Spokane-Spokane Valley, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area St. Cloud, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area St. George, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area St. Joseph, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area St. Louis, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area State College, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Staunton-Waynesboro, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV MSA Stockton-Lodi, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sumter, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Tallahassee, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Terre Haute, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Texarkana, TX-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area The Villages, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Topeka, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Trenton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Tucson, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Tuscaloosa, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Tyler, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Urban Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area Utica-Rome, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Valdosta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Victoria, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Vineland-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Visalia-Porterville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Waco, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Walla Walla, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Warner Robins, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Watertown-Fort Drum, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Wausau, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Wenatchee, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Wheeling, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Wichita Falls, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 1,140 335 221 166 807 195 196 248 1,012 883 1,617 199 2,770 768 344 493 1,048 187 11,152 144 171 49 9,483 212 803 1,317 22,725 184 101 155 2,201 296 1,706 6,092 1,503 365 229 2,013 368 206 6,442 44 751 7,171 3,884 192 79 331 48,973 219 46 195 95 301 123 65 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $404.87 $404.23 $276.38 $233.69 $238.79 $325.43 $240.79 $227.36 $254.66 $245.96 $326.85 $244.10 $363.33 $262.65 $257.65 $326.08 $535.84 $257.40 $300.68 $365.57 $379.25 $136.29 $650.40 $236.42 $254.50 $330.39 $406.15 $223.71 $198.15 $417.54 $259.57 $221.76 $486.51 $365.89 $249.79 $286.97 $307.69 $819.09 $256.00 $281.43 $726.24 $238.42 $359.35 $392.71 $423.28 $202.42 $353.43 $275.85 $640.19 $206.19 $218.36 $300.58 $241.60 $363.29 $171.48 $159.33 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 38% 43% 31% 32% 31% 35% 36% 26% 35% 32% 32% 36% 34% 33% 38% 32% 37% 37% 35% 35% 36% 22% 38% 35% 34% 31% 38% 38% 29% 42% 35% 29% 37% 35% 33% 32% 35% 34% 36% 32% 36% 33% 35% 32% 36% 31% 35% 33% 35% 32% 29% 37% 37% 30% 30% 28% 45 Appendix 8: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Williamsport, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Wilmington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Winchester, VA-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Worcester, MA-CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Yakima, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Yauco, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area York-Hanover, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Yuba City, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Yuma, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 818 159 1,148 824 1,821 5,650 417 5 1,713 1,329 1,440 1,208 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $240.25 $210.76 $379.64 $455.94 $273.50 $506.74 $278.63 $188.51 $367.31 $256.14 $500.35 $338.91 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 34% 30% 34% 31% 33% 37% 31% 29% 32% 37% 36% 35% 46
@FedFRASER