View original document

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 First Quarter 2015

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REPORT
THROUGH THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2015

MHA AT-A-GLANCE
More than 2.3 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions have taken place under
Making Home Affordable (MHA) programs
Through March 2015, participating servicers have referred nearly 233,000 homeowners to free financial
counseling. Post modification counseling is designed to help the homeowner stay current in the modification by
addressing the homeowner’s current overall financial situation, including the financial hardship that caused the
homeowner to default on his or her original mortgage loan.
See page 11 for more information.

QUARTERLY PROGRAM VOLUMES FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2015
(Months of January, February and March)

1MP

2MP

HAFA

UP

Q1: 49K
PTD: 1.8M

Q1: 2K
PTD: 147K

Q1: 16K
PTD: 357K

Q1: .8K
PTD: 43K

See Page 13

See Page 13

See Page 4

See Page 12

FIRST QUARTER 2015 SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS
SERVICER
Bank of America, N.A.

MINOR
IMPROVEMENT
NEEDED




Nationstar Mortgage LLC



Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC



Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

SUBSTANTIAL
IMPROVEMENT
NEEDED



CitiMortgage, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

MODERATE
IMPROVEMENT
NEEDED



Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
See page 16 for additional information and detailed results for this quarter.



2

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Table of Contents
MHA PROGRAM UPDATES

4

HAMP PROGRAM RESULTS:
HAMP Summary
HAMP Modification Characteristics
HAMP Tier 1 Payment Adjustment Summary
Performance of Permanent HAMP Tier 1 Modifications
Homeowners with Disqualified Modifications
MHA Borrower Outreach and Intake Project
Post Modification Counseling

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

OTHER MHA PROGRAMS:
Principal Reduction Alternative / 2MP Program
HAFA Program / Unemployment Program

12
13

RESULTS BY SERVICER:
MHA Program Activity by Servicer and Investor
Servicer Assessment Results

14
15-21

APPENDIX:
Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
Terms and Methodologies
End Notes
HAMP Activity by State
HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State
HAMP Tier 1 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

3

Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015
MHA Program Updates
• Beginning in February of 2015, homeowners became eligible to receive $10,000 in relocation assistance
when they complete a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure through Treasury’s Home Affordable
Foreclosure Alternatives® (HAFA) Program.
• For the first quarter of 2015, servicers either sustained or slightly increased performance from the prior
quarter, with one servicer moving from the “moderate improvement” category into “minor improvement”
category. One servicer earned three stars - the highest rating- for each metric category, but was rated as
needing “moderate improvement” due to lack of progress in implementing previously reported
improvements identified through regularly scheduled compliance reviews. This quarter’s results indicate that
some servicers need to continue to focus on income calculation accuracy as well as on appropriate
communication with potentially eligible MHA borrowers, as identified in the “second look disagree” testing.
Quarterly Trending of MHA Permanent Modifications Started
& Estimated Number of Loans 60+ Days Delinquent*
3.5

70
60

3.0

50
40

2.5

30
20

2.0

Delinquent Loans
(Millions)

Permanent Modifications
(Thousands)

80

10
0

1.5
Q4 2013

HAMP TIER 1 NON-GSE

Q1 2014
HAMP TIER 1 GSE

Q2 2014

Q3 2014

HAMP TIER 2

GSE SAI

Q4 2014

Q1 2015

FHA/RD-HAMP

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

Q1 2015

QoQ % Change

1,804,468

48,896

-19%

HAMP Tier 1

1,378,855

15,387

-14%

HAMP Tier 2

98,702

13,714

-1%

248,794

12,526

-3%

78,117

7,269

-53%

2MP Modifications Started

146,925

2,251

-24%

HAFA Transactions Completed

357,388

16,234

-9%

UP Forbearance Plans Started

42,971

829

24%

2,351,752

68,210

-17%

MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications Started

GSE Standard Modifications (SAI)
Treasury FHA and RD HAMP

Cumulative Activity

4

Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

HAMP Summary
All Trials Started1
Tier 1

2,184,970

Tier 2

127,098

Active Trials

42,629

Trial Modifications Cancelled Since Verified Income Requirement*

93,640

Trial
Modifications

Permanent
Modifications

2,312,068

All Permanent Modifications Started

1,477,557

Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)**

455,964

Active Permanent Modifications

974,249

* 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, 698,242 trials were cancelled, for a
cumulative 791,882 trials cancelled program-to-date.
** Does not include 47,088 loans paid off and 256 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
5%
2%

18%

Action Pending
Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process

4%

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 First Quarter 2015

Select HAMP Modification Characteristics
Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated
at approximately $34.8 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

94.4%

Median Monthly Gross
Income

$3,911

$5,085

$3,975

77.3%

60.6%

Median Credit Score

565

559

565

32.1%

30.7%

Median Property Value $176,800

$145,000

$175,000

Modification Step

Tier 1

Tier 2

All

Interest Rate Reduction

95.9%

72.4%

Term Extension

59.4%

Principal Forbearance

30.6%

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%

21.0%

-6.4 pct pts

All

43.3%

31.0%

-12.8 pct pts

•

25% 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

68.0%

50.9%

-13.8 pct pts

Tier 2

43.7%

36.3%

-6.4 pct pts

All

66.4%

49.7%

-13.0 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing Payment
Tier 1

$1,389.12

$818.42

($501.08)

Tier 2

$1,050.77

$691.76

($326.85)

All

$1,366.34

$810.12

($485.38)

6

Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results
Program Performance Report First 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.
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 $95, and the median monthly payment increase after
the final interest rate increase is $211.

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 March 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.

7

Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Performance of HAMP Tier 1 Permanent Modifications
Performance of HAMP modifications has improved over time. For modifications seasoned 24 months, 17.8% of
modifications started in 2013 have disqualified, compared to 28.9% of modifications started in 2009. Compared with
other non-HAMP modifications, HAMP modifications continue to exhibit lower delinquency and re-default rates than
industry modifications, as reported in the latest report by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
The table below shows the performance of HAMP permanent modifications at various seasoning points for those
modifications that have aged to, or past, the number of months noted.
% of Disqualified Modifications3

# Months Post
Modification

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Q1 2015

ALL

3

2.1%

1.7%

1.2%

1.0%

0.8%

1.1%

1.0%

1.3%

6

6.7%

6.7%

5.3%

4.3%

3.8%

4.6%

5.5%

12

16.3%

15.6%

12.7%

10.3%

9.4%

10.4%

13.2%

18

22.9%

22.7%

18.9%

15.3%

14.0%

19.6%

24

28.9%

28.0%

23.7%

19.1%

17.8%

24.9%

30

33.4%

32.6%

27.3%

22.4%

29.5%

36

37.6%

36.6%

30.0%

26.0%

33.7%

42

41.1%

39.3%

33.0%

37.3%

48

43.6%

41.6%

36.4%

40.9%

54

46.0%

43.8%

44.1%

60

48.0%

47.5%

47.6%

See Appendix 6 for additional information on HAMP Tier 1 performance by vintage.

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.

3-Month Re-default Rate

8%

Conditional Re-default Rate by Modification Year
(% of Active Loans)

2009

7%

2010

6%

2011

5%

2012
2013

4%

2014

3%
2%
1%

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.

8

Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Homeowners with Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications
Homeowners now have alternatives 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 25% have been referred to foreclosure.

Status of Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications
Action Pending
Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process
Borrower Current / Loan Pay off
Alternative Modification / Payment Plan

16%

8%
5%

Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu
Foreclosure Starts
Foreclosure Completions
8%

15%

13%

35%

Source: Survey data from large servicers2

9

Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Making Home Affordable Borrower Outreach and Intake Project
From February 2013 to December 2014, Treasury partnered with NeighborWorks America®, a non-profit corporation
established by Congress and the administrator of the National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling Program (NFMC), to
implement the Making Home Affordable Outreach and Borrower Intake Project. Through this partnership, Treasury was
able to engage a nationwide network of housing counseling organizations to increase outreach and support to struggling
homeowners seeking assistance through MHA. In particular, the project aimed to reach homeowners who were
potentially eligible for MHA, but who may not be responsive to traditional outreach methods, such as solicitations from
mortgage servicers. Participating counseling agencies conducted local outreach in communities across the country,
provided a preliminary assessment of homeowners’ eligibility for MHA, and helped homeowners complete and submit
applications for assistance under MHA.

Training and Outreach Events
NeighborWorks assisted Treasury at MHA borrower
outreach events throughout the duration of the
project, and arranged for trained housing counselors to
be available at each event. Additionally, NeighborWorks
worked with Treasury to design and conduct counselorled borrower outreach events. These smaller events
targeted markets and populations that may not have
been sufficiently served through traditional events.
NeighborWorks also offered participating agencies and
their counselors a two-day, in-person training course
through the NeighborWorks Training Institute on how
to help homeowners through MHA, as well as a variety
of webinars and place-based training.

Outreach and Training

Number of Events

Outreach
Traditional

15

Counselor Led

11

Training
In-Person

14

Web-Based

8

Application Intake Results
Packages were electronically delivered by participating agencies to the applicable servicer for review. Nearly 4,000
packages were accepted as complete for evaluation. The primary reason that servicers rejected complete initial packages
was that the borrower was not eligible to participate in the MHA program.
Reason for Rejection of Package

Final Status of Packages Submitted

5%
31%

34%

Duplicate

Withdrawn /
Incomplete

37%

Rejected
Accepted
34%

58%

Not MHA Eligible
Previous Denial/No
Change in
Circumstance

10

Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Post Modification Counseling
Effective March 2014, Treasury requires certain HAMP participating servicers to offer free financial counseling to
homeowners with non-GSE loans who are either entering a HAMP trial modification, or those in a permanent HAMP
modification who 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 March 2015, participating servicers have referred nearly 233,000 homeowners to financial counseling. Of these
referrals:
•
62% are permanent modifications considered by the servicers to be at risk of disqualifying from HAMP,
38% are new trials.
•
Nearly 15,000 homeowners started financial counseling, including more than 3,600 who have completed
counseling (multiple sessions spanning several months), resulting in an overall take up rate of 6%.

Counseling Referral Activity by Servicer
At-Risk

Trials

70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Bank of
CitiMortgage
America, N.A.
Inc

% of Referrals
Who Take Up
Counseling

4%

9%

JPMorgan
Nationstar
Ocwen Loan
Select
Chase Bank, Mortgage LLC Servicing, LLC
Portfolio
N.A.
Servicing, Inc.

14%

2%

1%

10%

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

8%

Other HAMP
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 First Quarter 2015

The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative
The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) 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.

All Permanent Modifications Started
Active Permanent Modifications
Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent
Modifications5
Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent
Modifications (%)6
Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Permanent
Modifications5

HAMP
Modifications with
Earned Principal
Reduction Under
PRA4

HAMP
Modifications with
Upfront Principal
Reduction Outside
of PRA

Total HAMP
Modifications with
Principal
Reduction

181,977
141,432

49,943
39,219

231,920
180,651

$67,817

$54,399

$64,151

32.4%

18.0%

30.5%

$16,259,121,672

$3,313,601,755

$19,572,723,427

The Second Lien Modification Program7
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)*

146,925

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments

40,197

Active Second Lien Modifications**

84,813

Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments

10,902

* Includes 5,969 loans that have a qualifying first lien GSE Standard Modification.
** Includes 7,684 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.

12

Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs
Program Performance Report First 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 Standard HAFA program to align with Treasury’s HAFA program. In HAFA
transactions, homeowners who need to relocate:
• Follow a streamlined process for short sales and DIL 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.
* Prior to February 1, 2015 homeowners received $3,000.

HAFA Activity by Investor Type
Participating servicers
must consider all
homeowners not eligible
for HAMP, or who request
a short sale or DIL, for
HAFA in accordance with
their “HAFA Policy” and
investor guidelines.

Private
Short Sale
Deed-in-Lieu
Total Transactions
Completed

Portfolio

GSE

Total

128,177

46,244

141,221

315,642

5,943

3,440

32,363

41,746

134,120

49,684

173,584

357,388

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 up to 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

42,971

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required

36,519

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required

6,452

13

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Making Home Affordable Program Activity by Servicer
As of March 2015, there are 128 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

101,910

2,801

6,017

36,780

48,305

41,414

4,280

4,514

18,990

1,668

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

174,515

1,833

25,150

41,212

36,660

Nationstar Mortgage LLC

148,304

10,109

8,772

4,968

7,051

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

263,692

42,433

80,736

N/A

20,869

79,017

11,874

12,671

N/A

15,710

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

198,318

7,772

30,268

22,616

33,636

Other Servicers

371,685

17,600

13,849

22,359

19,905

1,378,855

98,702

181,977

146,925

183,804

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.

40,988

45,170

18,553

104,711

CitiMortgage, Inc.

18,091

8,636

18,967

45,694

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

76,461

58,245

41,642

176,348

Nationstar Mortgage LLC

93,728

60,332

4,353

158,413

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

55,902

228,029

22,194

306,125

672

83,222

6,997

90,891

80,204

43,428

82,458

206,090

Other Servicers

276,028

53,766

59,491

389,285

Total

642,074

580,828

254,655

1,477,557

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

14

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Making Home Affordable Servicer Assessments
Through ongoing compliance reviews performed by MHA-C, a division of Freddie Mac acting as Treasury’s compliance
agent for MHA, Treasury requires participating servicers to take specific actions to improve their servicing processes, as
needed. MHA-C tests and evaluates a range of servicers’ activities to determine compliance with MHA guidelines. MHA-C
shares the results of each review with the servicer, requires remediation of identified issues, and reports to Treasury on
the results of all reviews. The results of reviews are also used to generate the servicer assessments.
Each quarter, MHA-C tests between 400 and 600 loan files at each of the largest servicers in order to evaluate whether the
servicer is in compliance with various aspects of the MHA program guidelines. The same test procedures are performed
on smaller servicers on a quarterly or semi‐annual cycle due to the lower volume of activity. Loan samples are selected
for testing from each servicer’s population of loan modifications and related activity reported into the MHA system of
record, as well as from the servicer’s records of non-performing loans with delinquencies from 90 – 120 days. This
approach provides comprehensive insight into how each servicer is executing MHA programs with respect to properly
identifying, contacting, evaluating and servicing borrowers who are potentially eligible for the MHA program, as well as the
accuracy and timeliness of servicer’s reporting of program information including incentive payment accuracy.
In June 2011, Treasury began publishing quarterly servicer assessments for the large servicers participating in MHA to
drive servicers to improve their performance. The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested and
provide a rating of the results. The assessments not only provide greater transparency to the public about servicer
performance in the program, but also prompt servicers to correct identified instances of non-compliance.
While the quarterly assessment scoring and reporting is focused on three major compliance categories and the seven
quantitative metrics tested, MHA-C examines as many as 60 compliance criteria (see Appendix 1) and reports the results of
all tests to the servicer. For areas of non-compliance or ineffective internal controls, Treasury requires servicers to take
remedial actions which include, but are not limited to: performing retroactive analysis when an issue is potentially
systemic, identifying and reevaluating any affected loans, enhancing the effectiveness of internal controls, and conducting
staff training on servicer procedures and program guidelines.
In addition to compliance data, the assessments include program results based on 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 under MHA guidelines and report program data to Treasury. Although the servicers are not given an overall
rating for this data, the results nonetheless compare a servicer’s performance for a given quarter against the other large
servicers participating in the program.
Starting with the third quarter of 2013, the servicer assessments were enhanced to, among other things, present new
compliance metrics and related benchmarks. These changes help provide additional insight into the impact of servicer
performance on the homeowner’s experience, allow for trending analysis of all compliance metrics, and foster further
improvement in servicer performance.
Servicer participation in MHA is voluntary, based on a contract with Fannie Mae as financial agent on behalf of Treasury.
Although Treasury does not regulate these institutions and does not have the authority to impose fines or penalties,
Treasury can, pursuant to the contract, take certain remedial actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA
guidelines. Such remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of 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 every successful permanent modification under HAMP, and payments for completed short sale/DIL
transactions pursuant to HAFA.

15

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

1st Quarter 2015 Servicer Assessment Summary Results
Improvement Needed

Servicer Name
Bank of America, N.A.

Minor

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

CitiMortgage, Inc.
Moderate

Nationstar Mortgage LLC
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC*
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Substantial

None

* Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC was found to need moderate improvement, however, their compliance results approached the level
required for a determination of minor improvement.

The Determination Process: Results of the Data
Treasury reviews the compliance data and ratings, the program results metrics, and other relevant factors affecting servicer
performance (including, but not limited to, a servicer’s progress in implementing previously identified improvements) in
determining whether a servicer needs substantial improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its
overall performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the significant factors impacting those decisions.
Based on those assessments, Treasury may take remedial action against servicers.
Consequences for Servicers
For servicers in need of substantial improvement, Treasury will, absent extenuating circumstances, withhold financial
incentives owed to those servicers until they make certain identified improvements. In certain cases, particularly where
there is a failure to correct identified problems within a reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently reduce the
financial incentives. Servicers in need of moderate improvement may be subject to withholding in the future if they fail to
make certain identified improvements. All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their participation in
MHA; these withholdings do not apply to incentives paid to servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors.

16

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First 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.



Category
Identifying and
Contacting
Homeowners

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

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

5.0%

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did
not concur with servicer's MHA determination
for applicable programs

2.0%

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C
was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA
determination for applicable programs

2.0%

Second Look % Disagree



Second Look % Unable to Determine





Homeowner
Evaluation and
Assistance

Assesses whether
servicer correctly
evaluates homeowners'
eligibility for MHA
programs and
accurately
communicates
decisions.



Program
Management and
Reporting

Assesses whether the
servicer has effective
program management
and submits timely and
accurate program
reports and
information.

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%

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance



Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did
not concur with completion and accuracy of the
notices sent to homeowners communicating
reasons for non-approval, in accordance with
MHA guidelines

5.0%

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

5.0%

17

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

1st Quarter Compliance Results

Disqualified
NonSecond Look Income
Incentive
Single Point Second Look
Modification
Approval
Unable to Calculation
Payment
Disagree
of Contact
NonNotice NonDetermine
Error
Data Errors
compliance
compliance

Servicer

BENCHMARK

Bank of
America, N.A.

CitiMortgage,
Inc.
JP Morgan
Chase Bank,
N.A.

Nationstar
Mortgage LLC

Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC

Select
Portfolio
Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.

5.0%

2.0%

2.0%

2.0%

5.0%

2.0%

5.0%

Servicer
Result

0.0%

1.4%

0.0%

2.0%

0.0%

0.3%

0.8%

Rating

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

Servicer
Result

0.0%

4.4%

0.5%

3.0%

5.0%

0.5%

2.3%

Rating

***

**

***

**

***

***

***

Servicer
Result

0.0%

0.4%

0.0%

1.0%

2.2%

0.0%

0.0%

Rating

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

Servicer
Result

0.0%

4.4%

2.5%

5.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

Rating

***

**

**

**

***

***

***

Servicer
Result

0.0%

1.9%

0.0%

0.0%

3.1%

0.7%

1.8%

Rating

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

Servicer
Result

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

1.0%

1.8%

1.2%

0.0%

Rating

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

Servicer
Result

0.0%

1.4%

0.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.3%

9.3%

Rating

***

***

***

***

***

***

*

18

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Compliance Results Trending
Starting with the third quarter of 2013, the Servicer Assessment has been enhanced to present new compliance metrics
and related benchmarks, including a methodology change to the metrics on this page. The coverage of these metrics now
includes additional MHA components and programs, such as HAMP Tier 2, and the Second Lien Modification Program.
Thus, starting in Q3 2013, the results of these metrics are not entirely comparable to previous quarters.

Servicer

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2011 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013

Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 2015

Second Look % Disagree
Bank of
America

1.5%

0.8%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

1.0%

1.2%

1.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.9%

1.4%

1.4%

0.0%

1.4%

1.4%

CitiMortgage

2.0%

0.5%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

2.0%

6.7%

1.3%

4.7%

5.6%

4.3%

1.4%

15.2%

4.2%

3.7%

4.4%

JPMorgan
Chase

1.6%

1.2%

0.0%

0.7%

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.2%

0.7%

1.0%

1.4%

1.8%

0.5%

0.9%

0.9%

0.4%

N/A

1.7%

1.6%

1.4%

0.0%

0.0%

4.4%

Nationstar

N/A

Ocwen

6.7%

2.7%

0.0%

0.7%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.7%

3.1%

2.3%

3.8%

3.5%

0.5%

3.1%

0.5%

1.9%

SPS

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

2.0%

1.3%

2.0%

1.7%

4.0%

1.2%

0.6%

1.2%

2.2%

0.5%

Wells Fargo

1.2%

0.4%

0.4%

0.0%

0.3%

1.0%

1.3%

3.0%

1.3%

3.0%

4.4%

3.1%

2.5%

2.8%

1.4%

1.0%

1.4%

Second Look Unable to Determine %
Bank of
America

8.2%

1.5%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

CitiMortgage 13.3% 5.5%

0.5%

1.0%

0.5%

1.0%

3.8%

6.0%

4.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.5%

JPMorgan
Chase

0.9%

1.0%

0.7%

1.7%

1.4%

3.8%

3.1%

2.7%

2.0%

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

N/A

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.5%

2.5%

18.8%

11.3%

3.2%

Nationstar

N/A

Ocwen

10.3%

3.0%

2.4%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.3%

0.0%

0.0%

2.0%

0.0%

1.0%

0.0%

1.1%

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

SPS

2.3%

0.3%

0.8%

0.0%

3.0%

0.0%

0.7%

0.7%

0.7%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

1.2%

0.0%

0.0%

Wells Fargo

6.0%

1.3%

1.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

1.0%

0.5%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.1%

0.0%

0.0%

0.5%

0.0%

Income Calculation Error %
Bank of
America

6.0%

6.0%

5.0%

2.0%

3.0%

1.0%

3.0%

3.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

CitiMortgage 10.0% 12.0% 6.0%

3.0%

4.0%

1.0%

3.1%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

2.0%

6.0%

1.0%

3.0%

3.0%

JPMorgan
Chase

10.0%

9.0%

0.0%

2.0%

0.0%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.0%

N/A

3.0%

3.0%

5.0%

4.0%

3.0%

5.0%

22.0% 13.2%

31.0% 20.6%

6.0%

Nationstar

N/A

Ocwen

33.0%

2.0%

2.0%

2.0%

3.0%

3.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.0%

1.3%

0.5%

0.5%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

0.0%

SPS

15.0% 10.0%

3.2%

1.0%

3.0%

2.0%

3.0%

2.0%

0.0%

3.1%

2.1%

3.1%

6.0%

6.0%

3.0%

2.0%

1.0%

Wells Fargo

27.0%

5.5%

4.0%

2.0%

0.0%

1.0%

1.5%

1.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

1.0%

4.4%

19

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First Quarter 2015

Program Results

Trials Aged 6+ Months (% of Active Trials)10

40%

Q2 2014

Q3 2014

Q4 2014

Q1 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.

Q2’14

579

469

492

1,226

2,728

1,076

931

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

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

Q2 2014

Q3 2014

Q4 2014

Q1 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.

20

Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer
Program Performance Report First 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.
Q2 2014

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Q3 2014

Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase
N.A.
Bank, N.A.

Q4 2014

Nationstar
Mortgage LLC

Q1 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.

14.0%

Q2 2014

Q3 2014

Q4 2014

Q1 2015

12.0%

% Missing

10.0%
8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
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.

21

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 March 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.

22

Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
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.
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 March
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. The servicer assessments have set a
benchmark for providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing against specific metrics. But, in addition
to this direct effect, MHA has had an important indirect effect on the market as well. MHA has established standards that have
improved mortgage modifications across the industry, and has led to important changes in the way mortgage servicers assist
struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how mortgage modifications should be designed so that they
are sustainable, standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as efficient and as understandable as possible,
and a variety of standards for protecting homeowners, such as prohibitions on “dual tracking” – simultaneously evaluating a
homeowner for a modification while proceeding to foreclose. Treasury believes these assessments will continue to set the standard
for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist homeowners.

23

Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
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 industryaccepted 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.

It is important to note that Treasury’s compliance work related to MHA applies only to those servicers that have agreed to participate
in MHA for mortgage loans that are not owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (the GSEs). Treasury cannot and does
not perform compliance reviews of (1) mortgage loans or activities that fall outside of MHA, (2) GSE loans or (3) those loans insured
through the Federal Housing Administration. For each servicer, the loans that are eligible for MHA represent only a portion of that
servicer’s overall mortgage servicing operation.
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 % Disagree:
Second Look is a process in which MHA-C reviews 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 percentage of loans reviewed in Second Look
where MHA-C did not concur with a servicer’s solicitation efforts and/or eligibility review.
Second Look % Unable to Determine:
This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second Look 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 both Second Look Disagree and Unable to Determine 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 Disagree or Unable to Determine remain on foreclosure hold until the servicer completes the
appropriate corrective actions.

24

Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
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.
Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance:
Correctly communicating reasons for non-approval may affect homeowners’ awareness of other foreclosure alternatives or the ability
to challenge the non-approval. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the
completion or accuracy of the notices sent to homeowners communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA
guidelines.
For Non-Approval Notice results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting the
non-approval letter template, and engaging in systemic process remediation in order to deliver accurate non-approval notices.
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.

25

Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
MHA-C Compliance Criteria Tested
Identifying and Contacting Homeowners
Criteria Tested

Review Type
Second Look
Directed Actions

Objective
Servicers appropriately solicited borrowers for HAMP and that the
servicer met the reasonable efforts requirements

Second Lien Solicitation

Second Look

Servicers have 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

Servicers sent potentially eligible borrowers HAMP packages
following RPC

Timely SPOC Assignment

Second Look

Servicers 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

Upon receiving any part of a HAMP package, servicers sent an
Acknowledgement Letter to the borrower within the required time
frame

Core Eligibility/Incentive

Accuracy of Incomplete
Information Notice (IIN) sent, Second Look
where applicable

Upon receiving part of a HAMP Package but not all required
information, servicers 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
Validation of Tier 2 Denials
Second Lien Denials

Second Look
Second Look
Second Look

Denials of Tier 1 HAMP modifications are valid
Denials of Tier 2 HAMP modifications are valid
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

Approval Decision

Core Eligibility/Incentive

Servicer made correct decision to approve the modification

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

Servicer performed accurate analysis of borrower escrow to use in
modification

Core Eligibility/Incentive

26

Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
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

Servicers sends accurate TPP Notices to borrowers entering a Trial
modification

Application of TPP payments Core Eligibility/Incentive

Servicer accurately applies 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

Servicers 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 TPP to Perm. Mod.

Core Eligibility/Incentive

At time of conversion to permanent modification, servicer has
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 applies 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 send accurate Non-Approval Notices for denied second lien
modifications within specified time frame

Accurate HAFA Eligibility
Assessment

Second Look, Core
Eligibility/Incentive

Servicer reviews HAFA applications and makes appropriate eligibility
decision

HAFA - Release of Liens

Core Eligibility/Incentive

Servicers obtained release of all liens on properties completing a
HAFA short sale or deed-in-lieu

Validation of HAFA Denials

Second Look

Servicer properly evaluated borrower and denial is valid

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 applies 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 sends 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

Servicer sends accurate second notice of Interest Rate Increase
between 60 and 75 days prior to rate increase

Core Eligibility/Incentive

27

Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes
Accuracy of step rate
increases

Core Eligibility/Incentive

Servicer accurately calculates and implements HAMP rate increases

Appropriate timing on
reporting of denial to IR2 (i.e.
Second Look
at least 30 days after letter
sent)

Servicer reports HAMP denials to the Program Administrator in
accordance with program guidelines

Accurate reporting of HAMP
Trials/Perm Mods to IR2

Servicers accurately report modification information to the Program
Administrator including all data used in calculating incentives

Core Eligibility/Incentive

2MP Incentive Compensation
- Servicer, Borrower &
Core Eligibility/Incentive
Investor

Incentive compensation for second lien modifications is accurate

Accurate reporting of 2MP
Trials/Perm Mods to IR2

Core Eligibility/Incentive

Servicers report 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

Servicers report 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

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

28

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.

29

Appendix 3: 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 12,904 OMRs for modifications that have aged up to or through 60 months,
or 1.5% of the total required OMRs in the current reporting period. In addition, reported loan
counts may shift from prior reports due to servicer data corrections. 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 permanent
modifications that have aged 60 months may range between 47.2% and 47.5%.

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.

Other MHA Programs

Survey data indicates that program to date, 356,535 qualifying first lien modifications have been
matched with a second lien. Of these matched second liens, approximately 54% 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.

7

10

30

Appendix 4: 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

1,240
16,303
6,389
91,089
495,037
31,082
31,545
4,119
7,618
286,748
88,539
8,381
7,000
8,639
120,306
25,504
6,780
10,448
16,001
52,802
75,194
6,749
69,373
36,292
27,113
9,952
2,795
47,676
473
3,760
10,198
80,807
8,330
52,939
116,878
57,290
7,353
25,482
57,162
10,981
24,933
1,016
28,196
78,732
18,897
54,446
2,008
47,348
23,623
3,581
1,196
5,681
2,312,068

Permanent Modifications
Started

Median Monthly Payment
Reduction

697
9,622
3,645
53,785
337,627
19,564
20,914
2,576
4,914
182,143
54,070
5,516
3,998
5,294
78,443
15,498
3,877
6,299
9,804
35,623
48,934
4,532
42,301
22,372
16,107
6,091
1,620
29,011
246
2,272
6,763
52,891
5,127
32,219
77,448
33,300
4,103
16,028
36,159
7,444
14,924
552
17,375
44,720
12,084
34,153
1,403
31,070
15,078
2,089
727
4,478
1,477,557

$479.33
$261.33
$247.48
$441.39
$714.64
$407.54
$528.40
$545.88
$409.28
$470.04
$359.68
$795.58
$248.58
$368.41
$505.16
$259.41
$287.51
$264.41
$281.89
$581.27
$565.68
$387.57
$341.95
$418.83
$292.41
$250.73
$398.00
$302.43
$271.02
$260.34
$466.40
$629.88
$346.98
$526.15
$786.01
$289.51
$244.46
$455.45
$344.01
$536.91
$296.53
$257.81
$284.78
$283.40
$430.11
$483.72
$364.21
$503.88
$345.26
$308.50
$357.56
$287.62
$485.38

Median Monthly Payment
Reduction % of PreModification Payment
31%
31%
32%
37%
37%
33%
37%
32%
32%
40%
36%
34%
32%
33%
40%
33%
32%
33%
32%
35%
34%
35%
37%
35%
34%
33%
32%
33%
30%
33%
34%
37%
33%
38%
39%
36%
32%
34%
33%
39%
33%
29%
34%
33%
32%
32%
33%
33%
35%
30%
29%
37%
36%

31

Appendix 5: 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

After Mod
Monthly
P&I

Monthly P&I
Total Monthly
Payment
P&I Payment
Increase at
Increase after All
First Interest
Increases
Rate Increase

Final Monthly
P&I Payment
Reduction from
Pre-Mod P&I

AK

44.94%

6.8%

$1,464.01

$4,166.84

$213,558.13

$857.08

$93.08

$179.77

-$410.00

AL

46.42%

6.8%

$873.13

$2,285.28

$120,523.08

$512.80

$48.79

$99.60

-$227.58

AR

45.56%

6.6%

$807.02

$2,122.76

$114,914.69

$468.96

$48.81

$101.88

-$200.94

AZ

49.27%

6.4%

$1,193.98

$2,816.67

$178,711.12

$672.49

$79.46

$193.64

-$290.83

CA

48.63%

6.1%

$1,942.92

$4,683.08

$306,752.22

$1,093.99

$138.19

$317.63

-$437.83

CO

46.27%

6.4%

$1,237.15

$3,196.11

$189,363.94

$754.47

$81.54

$181.59

-$278.11

CT

45.37%

6.5%

$1,458.75

$4,333.33

$211,071.74

$804.83

$92.74

$204.30

-$387.34

DC

47.88%

6.4%

$1,711.11

$4,120.63

$275,998.59

$994.16

$122.76

$275.12

-$368.62

DE

47.02%

6.5%

$1,282.66

$3,105.00

$196,114.66

$761.34

$83.80

$176.84

-$300.05

FL

47.58%

6.5%

$1,192.97

$3,276.00

$170,694.06

$629.40

$75.97

$172.23

-$333.73

GA

47.37%

6.5%

$1,006.22

$2,650.00

$144,027.35

$570.63

$62.49

$140.82

-$270.05

HI

48.93%

6.3%

$2,416.54

$5,370.95

$392,363.32

$1,399.42

$175.85

$382.47

-$490.40

IA

44.34%

6.6%

$780.80

$2,306.98

$109,000.00

$437.34

$45.69

$95.58

-$202.91

ID

48.46%

6.5%

$1,147.62

$2,726.36

$170,733.94

$668.98

$74.76

$166.80

-$275.96

IL

46.93%

6.5%

$1,282.77

$3,725.33

$179,838.29

$662.06

$80.10

$182.51

-$373.13

IN

45.98%

6.8%

$817.68

$2,164.92

$110,470.20

$464.38

$45.60

$96.64

-$215.57

KS

44.44%

6.6%

$899.96

$2,729.50

$126,575.88

$510.18

$51.64

$111.90

-$232.93

KY

45.49%

6.8%

$808.55

$2,209.50

$111,776.81

$467.60

$46.72

$98.41

-$210.02

LA

45.50%

6.9%

$899.99

$2,575.10

$125,269.10

$510.80

$51.93

$104.85

-$247.63

MA

46.98%

6.4%

$1,662.23

$4,343.95

$250,452.55

$939.62

$110.34

$245.47

-$402.99

MD

46.77%

6.4%

$1,669.09

$4,333.00

$259,287.66

$960.18

$115.19

$257.61

-$386.89

ME

46.52%

6.5%

$1,146.74

$3,034.50

$165,266.72

$641.89

$71.87

$149.77

-$293.77

MI

46.78%

6.5%

$958.43

$2,681.00

$130,378.60

$522.87

$55.62

$126.91

-$262.28

MN

46.02%

6.3%

$1,206.59

$3,310.67

$179,234.95

$695.63

$77.93

$179.63

-$293.19

MO

45.89%

6.6%

$884.75

$2,494.83

$124,385.32

$498.65

$52.62

$111.58

-$240.69

MS

46.18%

6.9%

$819.44

$2,237.65

$112,063.64

$458.31

$45.60

$91.67

-$228.55

MT

46.58%

6.4%

$1,262.50

$3,260.09

$192,089.87

$740.97

$81.90

$173.27

-$298.97

NC

46.23%

6.5%

$954.12

$2,526.69

$135,285.04

$554.45

$57.40

$119.72

-$243.68

ND

41.57%

6.6%

$882.50

$2,908.74

$135,690.93

$555.10

$56.31

$118.03

-$185.42

NE

43.69%

6.7%

$787.29

$2,503.75

$110,033.53

$464.13

$45.93

$93.73

-$210.64

NH

43.96%

6.4%

$1,351.63

$4,160.32

$199,015.18

$775.11

$85.95

$186.15

-$332.24

32

Appendix 5: 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

After Mod
Monthly
P&I

Monthly P&I
Total Monthly
Payment
P&I Payment
Increase at
Increase after All
First Interest
Increases
Rate Increase

Final Monthly
P&I Payment
Reduction from
Pre-Mod P&I

NJ

45.27%

6.4%

$1,711.70

$5,238.00

$251,321.42

$910.35

$112.12

$244.89

-$449.49

NM

47.08%

6.5%

$1,062.81

$2,751.00

$156,814.21

$628.12

$67.95

$146.63

-$272.79

NV

50.03%

6.3%

$1,370.53

$3,133.58

$207,818.57

$758.71

$92.96

$222.31

-$338.45

NY

47.17%

6.4%

$2,085.57

$5,687.50

$311,593.88

$1,112.69

$139.91

$305.09

-$548.25

OH

45.31%

6.6%

$823.32

$2,402.85

$111,626.54

$460.22

$46.48

$103.49

-$221.70

OK

44.59%

6.9%

$785.70

$2,385.72

$107,620.00

$453.09

$43.85

$89.40

-$214.35

OR

46.62%

6.4%

$1,328.63

$3,461.79

$207,159.08

$786.35

$91.68

$201.68

-$311.43

PA

45.17%

6.6%

$1,093.02

$3,211.21

$153,279.16

$606.62

$65.18

$134.59

-$285.88

RI

47.57%

6.4%

$1,367.68

$3,655.89

$197,403.12

$736.31

$87.73

$201.89

-$376.26

SC

46.65%

6.6%

$967.16

$2,513.33

$137,769.38

$561.63

$58.48

$123.19

-$243.94

SD

44.16%

6.4%

$929.37

$2,716.20

$136,243.17

$528.07

$56.77

$126.71

-$213.35

TN

46.88%

6.9%

$884.80

$2,324.35

$119,978.09

$500.68

$49.49

$103.71

-$248.46

TX

43.14%

7.0%

$864.81

$2,971.34

$119,614.14

$501.94

$49.88

$102.53

-$237.31

UT

47.36%

6.5%

$1,368.97

$3,291.17

$211,600.04

$817.19

$93.54

$211.04

-$306.01

VA

46.55%

6.4%

$1,592.48

$4,060.34

$248,616.17

$926.33

$109.04

$243.22

-$332.59

VT

45.99%

6.8%

$1,132.75

$3,120.00

$167,344.38

$634.16

$72.27

$157.18

-$292.74

WA

46.41%

6.4%

$1,516.96

$3,979.40

$241,785.98

$891.54

$107.29

$233.62

-$335.92

WI

45.00%

6.5%

$988.22

$3,000.00

$139,000.00

$549.52

$59.63

$128.36

-$266.20

WV

46.50%

6.6%

$1,082.19

$2,681.34

$155,013.29

$633.96

$63.88

$126.95

-$253.61

WY

46.15%

6.5%

$1,305.74

$3,228.23

$188,091.80

$800.36

$80.57

$166.65

-$293.64

PR

50.79%

6.4%

$772.75

$1,654.43

$103,243.90

$447.07

$44.09

$95.60

-$212.26

6.4%

$1,446.21

$3,800.77

$214,711.17

$800.25

$94.55

$211.08

-$347.34

Nation47.24%
wide*
* Includes U.S. Territories

33

Appendix 6: Performance of HAMP Tier 1 Modifications by Vintage
Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification
3
Mod.
Effective in:

6

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

2009Q3

3,583

10.7%

2009Q4

43,655

5.7%

2010Q1

123,902

2010Q2

12

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

4.5%

4,415

15.8%

1.9%

47,492

10.2%

4.3%

1.5%

150,196

147,557

5.3%

1.8%

2010Q3

86,207

5.1%

2010Q4

58,028

2011Q1

18

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

10.6%

4,634

25.9%

6.3%

51,389

20.4%

21.3%

4,965

32.3%

29.0%

15.8%

54,574

25.4%

10.4%

6.1%

161,100

22.4%

20.4%

16.1%

166,131

26.0%

157,177

12.3%

7.5%

22.4%

173,450

19.5%

16.1%

170,638

27.8%

1.9%

95,904

11.1%

24.1%

7.1%

104,183

18.2%

14.5%

106,149

25.3%

4.6%

1.8%

62,507

21.9%

8.9%

5.7%

65,131

18.4%

14.5%

66,686

24.0%

70,834

2.9%

1.0%

21.1%

75,848

8.2%

5.1%

79,566

17.0%

13.6%

81,143

22.2%

2011Q2

79,818

3.7%

19.2%

1.3%

89,074

9.4%

5.8%

92,553

16.2%

13.2%

91,826

23.1%

2011Q3

80,821

20.1%

3.7%

1.3%

85,885

8.8%

5.6%

86,849

15.6%

12.3%

86,589

21.8%

2011Q4

18.9%

64,870

3.4%

1.2%

67,390

6.9%

4.4%

67,714

14.7%

11.4%

67,863

19.3%

16.8%

2012Q1

49,351

2.5%

0.9%

50,795

6.8%

4.1%

50,821

14.1%

10.9%

50,214

18.5%

15.8%

2012Q2

43,956

3.0%

1.0%

44,936

7.7%

4.6%

45,214

13.6%

10.9%

44,733

18.9%

16.1%

2012Q3

47,262

3.1%

1.0%

48,939

7.3%

4.6%

49,673

13.0%

10.1%

50,204

17.9%

15.1%

2012Q4

39,267

3.2%

1.0%

41,182

6.3%

3.9%

42,400

12.3%

9.4%

42,668

16.3%

14.0%

2013Q1

39,222

2.2%

0.7%

40,875

6.1%

3.5%

42,002

12.6%

9.6%

42,382

16.6%

13.9%

2013Q2

31,525

2.6%

0.8%

32,996

6.5%

3.9%

33,686

11.7%

9.3%

33,951

16.4%

14.0%

2013Q3

31,935

2.9%

1.0%

33,406

7.0%

4.2%

34,802

12.1%

9.2%

34,602

16.4%

13.9%

2013Q4

27,285

2.9%

1.0%

28,608

6.3%

3.8%

29,889

12.2%

9.5%

10,171

16.4%

14.0%

2014Q1

23,674

2.5%

0.9%

25,560

6.8%

3.9%

26,397

13.1%

10.2%

2014Q2

19,018

3.7%

1.1%

19,830

7.8%

5.1%

7,469

13.4%

11.0%

2014Q3

17,012

3.5%

1.3%

17,832

7.9%

5.2%

2014Q4

15,148

3.8%

1.4%

5,456

7.3%

4.5%

2015Q1

4,796

3.1%

1.0%

All

1,148,726

3.9%

1.3%

1,226,303

9.0%

5.5%

1,248,922

16.6%

13.2%

1,205,489

22.7%

19.6%

Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification
24
Mod.
Effective in:

36

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

2009Q3

5,068

36.9%

2009Q4

55,528

31.6%

2010Q1

167,926

2010Q2

48

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

33.6%

5,167

44.0%

28.4%

56,351

39.7%

31.9%

28.7%

166,208

178,764

31.1%

28.7%

2010Q3

106,201

29.5%

2010Q4

66,447

2011Q1

80,788

2011Q2

60

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

#

60+ Days

90+ Days

41.8%

5,073

50.2%

37.2%

56,124

44.9%

48.6%

5,061

54.1%

52.6%

43.1%

55,380

48.9%

39.7%

37.5%

165,997

47.5%

44.6%

42.9%

163,605

48.4%

174,991

39.2%

37.4%

47.2%

174,351

43.7%

42.5%

56,833

49.4%

26.8%

104,469

37.1%

48.4%

35.2%

105,091

41.2%

39.8%

29.6%

26.5%

65,951

27.6%

24.9%

80,935

36.3%

34.2%

65,980

40.4%

38.8%

33.8%

31.9%

80,477

37.9%

91,403

27.3%

25.1%

36.5%

91,484

33.2%

31.6%

33,729

37.4%

2011Q3

85,066

25.8%

36.3%

23.4%

86,816

31.0%

29.2%

2011Q4

67,594

2012Q1

50,720

23.4%

21.0%

67,697

28.5%

26.8%

22.5%

20.0%

50,262

27.9%

2012Q2

25.9%

44,939

22.0%

20.0%

15,543

27.7%

26.1%

2012Q3

50,470

20.9%

18.6%

2012Q4

42,794

19.9%

17.6%

2013Q1

42,160

19.9%

17.7%

2013Q2

11,326

19.7%

18.1%

1,147,194

27.5%

24.9%

965,874

35.7%

33.7%

686,822

42.4%

40.9%

280,879

48.8%

47.6%

2013Q3
2013Q4
2014Q1
2014Q2
2014Q3
2014Q4
2015Q1
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.

34

Appendix 7: 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
Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan Statistical Area

Permanent
Modifications
Started

68
188
2,550
313
230
1,761
3,360
166
4,172
144
139
64
543
114
208
1,187
181
368
143
1,313
554
42,984
2,422
255
990
2,816
8,098
16,322
375
1,821
2,340
438
276
331
62
616
1,252
155
261
3,604
51
174
149
216
68
43
2,986
24,883
638
174
968
6,475
538
257
1,593
418
435

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$195.44
$253.80
$299.46
$242.64
$352.68
$359.46
$336.46
$243.54
$402.46
$216.59
$261.93
$278.51
$514.04
$180.26
$214.23
$420.75
$207.77
$307.75
$268.02
$351.05
$307.14
$378.15
$495.51
$283.75
$260.23
$331.38
$476.54
$474.00
$309.77
$613.23
$261.63
$266.77
$226.46
$221.94
$223.46
$478.62
$530.19
$291.67
$248.32
$281.04
$339.62
$302.78
$359.43
$266.65
$202.45
$246.02
$382.71
$627.63
$478.40
$243.98
$471.87
$711.03
$234.38
$329.88
$259.23
$262.29
$419.47

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
33%
36%
36%
30%
34%
34%
33%
29%
34%
31%
37%
33%
33%
27%
26%
36%
28%
34%
37%
33%
33%
37%
38%
29%
33%
33%
37%
32%
34%
36%
31%
38%
34%
33%
35%
34%
37%
27%
35%
32%
34%
30%
42%
31%
24%
38%
34%
36%
34%
34%
31%
40%
35%
33%
34%
32%
35%

35

Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA

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
El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area

Permanent
Modifications
Started

328
1,269
5,115
112
54
403
130
340
248
206
167
3,072
9,841
618
1,404
145
75,704
1,135
6,056
258
232
8,430
658
131
2,059
168
2,539
732
122
5,410
374
108
850
140
15,036
498
55
53
387
567
2,065
183
91
5,681
11,969
1,448
24,998
187
903
108
682
1,356
1,169
242
1,489
1,311

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$560.15
$263.68
$476.01
$231.56
$266.90
$525.93
$340.47
$252.35
$345.84
$246.38
$221.52
$353.68
$316.36
$391.29
$276.66
$275.18
$516.79
$459.66
$308.68
$226.50
$258.52
$307.02
$414.03
$220.10
$391.46
$243.79
$268.23
$268.89
$219.48
$321.92
$247.71
$347.65
$421.82
$246.68
$299.36
$262.84
$200.04
$172.03
$356.17
$241.73
$262.92
$228.18
$206.29
$393.73
$407.88
$271.98
$376.74
$214.12
$401.68
$253.24
$283.75
$322.94
$497.01
$291.60
$439.95
$247.94

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
32%
34%
40%
31%
44%
37%
29%
32%
31%
30%
32%
33%
33%
31%
34%
27%
41%
34%
35%
31%
32%
37%
33%
27%
33%
32%
32%
33%
31%
36%
32%
26%
36%
32%
33%
35%
38%
23%
35%
35%
35%
28%
35%
38%
33%
31%
38%
30%
30%
34%
33%
34%
41%
32%
35%
33%

36

Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA

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

137
606
109
377
1,162
430
65
15
181
119
635
1,210
327
1,791
489
152
167
859
245
867
8,734
170
694
1,137
246
340
165
61
34
564
2,994
319
77
1,098
587
2,519
355
2,172
41
730
1,621
212
910
1,099
250
5,574
233
1,039
577
121
238
425
788
145
262

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$238.72
$255.32
$270.88
$239.67
$394.06
$209.02
$339.78
$208.03
$275.83
$289.47
$237.57
$287.11
$530.03
$324.13
$222.66
$212.00
$292.57
$408.09
$215.61
$242.13
$481.10
$233.42
$335.57
$331.28
$443.17
$329.53
$240.86
$228.97
$230.84
$417.20
$286.94
$537.05
$261.72
$358.67
$346.76
$284.52
$274.11
$265.16
$183.65
$276.77
$427.52
$301.89
$425.30
$314.42
$406.17
$453.98
$238.40
$243.83
$521.24
$252.85
$256.51
$364.45
$640.33
$317.48
$246.28

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
30%
33%
40%
38%
33%
31%
23%
27%
30%
26%
33%
34%
34%
37%
31%
33%
33%
31%
30%
35%
37%
32%
35%
36%
36%
36%
33%
30%
32%
33%
34%
40%
29%
30%
38%
33%
33%
32%
34%
35%
32%
35%
34%
33%
34%
36%
31%
31%
42%
33%
27%
42%
26%
35%
31%

37

Appendix 7: 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
Lynchburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area

Permanent
Modifications
Started

16,138
302
621
294
5,386
106
51
623
1,679
295
9,962
166
579
154
253
102
77
231
876
850
431
5,817
356
268
352
952
1,753
228
148
81
573
170
265
1,274
4,454
1,085
1,521
508
346
26,410
157
98
259
96
328
808
203
365
1,119
208
136
414
82,789
23,630
3,163
170
447

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$286.48
$235.12
$235.39
$260.89
$275.49
$312.17
$343.54
$285.40
$250.02
$239.79
$371.31
$256.81
$264.18
$212.54
$255.86
$199.81
$242.10
$198.91
$1,072.95
$306.93
$352.79
$312.08
$269.23
$219.78
$239.12
$502.11
$264.36
$220.55
$263.75
$207.52
$241.73
$280.30
$230.23
$408.52
$369.12
$306.75
$314.82
$287.22
$326.08
$528.31
$319.87
$214.03
$297.23
$259.64
$332.90
$297.53
$248.49
$265.02
$243.52
$319.71
$224.90
$380.38
$850.57
$677.11
$265.13
$228.84
$250.51

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
34%
34%
30%
25%
32%
32%
34%
35%
32%
34%
35%
27%
34%
30%
32%
29%
32%
31%
40%
37%
37%
34%
31%
30%
33%
38%
31%
32%
29%
25%
30%
37%
31%
36%
36%
30%
36%
36%
30%
38%
32%
33%
30%
26%
34%
34%
39%
32%
31%
28%
32%
33%
40%
31%
33%
31%
28%

38

Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA

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
Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area

Permanent
Modifications
Started

850
1,665
1,203
2,133
62
151
304
82
1,185
1,219
7,114
2,438
77,425
340
97
67
5,793
18,406
246
1,195
6,621
217
743
817
48
264
482
176
602
1,747
1,118
2,437
5,039
114
5,477
4,212
105,134
477
5,264
1,398
2,445
567
53
1,797
1,798
1,033
1,730
26,390
273
115
7,414
4,489
365
631
101
155

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$277.80
$510.56
$396.12
$477.05
$330.37
$303.73
$237.93
$229.26
$252.02
$463.84
$296.40
$531.74
$544.80
$252.26
$296.96
$255.60
$358.14
$450.36
$410.55
$258.48
$566.70
$213.17
$355.06
$232.14
$379.46
$259.68
$506.12
$202.82
$243.80
$389.16
$834.29
$615.75
$311.58
$348.31
$476.72
$333.21
$809.95
$274.63
$475.41
$484.61
$361.74
$470.40
$203.44
$360.54
$258.07
$439.00
$272.75
$458.60
$278.16
$198.01
$841.32
$400.90
$335.61
$387.33
$185.44
$215.69

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
36%
38%
34%
33%
31%
30%
34%
38%
34%
35%
36%
38%
42%
33%
41%
29%
37%
36%
31%
35%
37%
27%
35%
29%
38%
32%
36%
31%
36%
37%
36%
42%
32%
42%
36%
35%
40%
34%
40%
37%
37%
33%
29%
28%
33%
32%
33%
39%
35%
32%
36%
38%
28%
36%
30%
26%

39

Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA

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
Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area

Permanent
Modifications
Started

1,635
440
27,620
42,418
78
4,150
235
162
182
5,146
2,496
11,101
1,636
1,330
10,788
2,535
590
1,230
739
3,484
149
1,345
1,114
3,939
5,642
66,710
733
409
1,635
1,395
371
178
22,519
449
1,615
3,388
1,379
5,700
51
3,298
23,863
29,049
79
9,282
3,666
1,538
71
564
1,489
611
2,045
4,012
1,281
1,365
19,999
1,121

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$307.19
$222.57
$400.68
$459.52
$248.85
$266.30
$330.17
$255.23
$241.35
$461.01
$444.82
$481.00
$497.21
$443.65
$537.78
$461.12
$264.67
$444.90
$354.54
$340.84
$322.11
$337.49
$447.91
$524.82
$370.25
$639.55
$273.47
$324.64
$265.05
$324.76
$247.44
$237.50
$611.89
$260.87
$384.61
$875.40
$426.99
$422.99
$168.26
$254.06
$764.84
$875.23
$241.57
$966.10
$301.07
$772.71
$217.31
$592.46
$982.61
$517.55
$775.78
$808.98
$323.27
$284.21
$561.91
$405.49

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
34%
33%
33%
37%
37%
34%
33%
31%
39%
39%
35%
34%
31%
36%
38%
32%
33%
41%
36%
32%
34%
32%
34%
36%
32%
37%
31%
33%
36%
38%
34%
31%
36%
36%
34%
40%
35%
33%
24%
32%
36%
38%
34%
37%
38%
36%
27%
30%
38%
35%
40%
37%
34%
35%
34%
38%

40

Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA

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

Permanent
Modifications
Started

317
211
163
771
188
187
243
978
859
1,577
187
2,677
754
334
486
1,042
184
10,829
137
165
49
9,372
203
771
1,269
22,171
175
92
152
2,139
280
1,635
5,983
1,442
343
221
1,953
351
196
6,338
41
706
6,964
3,803

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$411.23
$271.74
$229.60
$238.79
$327.92
$236.22
$223.23
$252.55
$245.96
$327.41
$244.10
$366.25
$263.15
$257.65
$325.46
$538.21
$252.74
$301.91
$367.85
$379.80
$136.29
$651.93
$244.96
$256.99
$331.55
$407.61
$222.88
$201.02
$421.65
$258.53
$221.76
$491.55
$366.68
$247.78
$286.97
$310.60
$819.09
$250.76
$283.88
$732.32
$251.86
$362.49
$393.86
$424.52

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
44%
31%
31%
31%
34%
35%
25%
35%
31%
32%
36%
34%
33%
38%
32%
37%
36%
35%
35%
36%
22%
38%
35%
34%
31%
38%
37%
29%
42%
35%
28%
37%
35%
32%
31%
35%
34%
35%
32%
36%
35%
35%
32%
36%

41

Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA

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
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

183
76
314
47,736
210
43
191
90
291
120
62
784
153
1,122
808
1,753
5,498
411
5
1,660
1,295
1,425
1,186

Median
Monthly
Payment
Reduction
$195.08
$353.41
$276.77
$641.63
$206.75
$256.17
$301.80
$241.63
$363.29
$187.44
$185.57
$238.26
$210.76
$379.50
$454.81
$271.65
$507.60
$279.67
$188.51
$367.37
$255.61
$499.94
$338.52

Median Monthly
Payment
Reduction % of
Pre-Modification
Payment
30%
35%
33%
35%
32%
36%
36%
37%
30%
32%
33%
33%
30%
34%
31%
33%
37%
32%
29%
32%
36%
36%
35%

42