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 Fourth Quarter 2014 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REPORT THROUGH THE FOURTH QUARTER OF 2014 MHA AT-A-GLANCE Nearly 2.3 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions have taken place under Making Home Affordable (MHA) programs Treasury recently published a research paper analyzing the performance of HAMP modifications to better understand the key factors affecting their performance. The analysis supports the proposition that HAMP modifications have a better probability of success than similar loans that are either not modified or modified outside of HAMP. While the higher success rate of HAMP modifications is partly attributable to their greater amount of payment reduction, the analysis found that HAMP modifications still perform better even after controlling for modification terms, including payment reduction. QUARTERLY PROGRAM VOLUMES FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER OF 2014 (Months of October, November and December) 1MP 2MP HAFA UP Q4: 60K PTD: 1.8M Q4: 3K PTD: 145K Q4: 18K PTD: 341K Q4: .67K PTD: 42K See Page 14 See Page 15 See Page 4 See Page 13 FOURTH QUARTER 2014 SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS SERVICER Bank of America, N.A. MINOR IMPROVEMENT NEEDED SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT NEEDED CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. MODERATE IMPROVEMENT NEEDED Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. See page 18 for additional information and detailed results for this quarter. 2 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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 Treasury’s Hardest Hit State Programs 5 6 7 8-9 10 11 OTHER MHA PROGRAMS: Principal Reduction Alternative 2MP Program HAFA Program Unemployment Program 12 13 14 15 RESULTS BY SERVICER: MHA Program Activity by Servicer and Investor Servicer Assessment Results 16 17-23 APPENDIX: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Terms and Methodologies 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 Fourth Quarter 2014 MHA Program Updates • In June 2014, Treasury issued guidance to servicers that expanded the eligibility for homeowners with FHAinsured loans for performance incentives under Treasury FHA-HAMP. This expansion aligned Treasury’s policy with policies previously issued by FHA for FHA-HAMP, which resulted in an increase in Treasury FHA-HAMP modifications, as noted in this report. • For the fourth quarter of 2014, servicers either showed sustained performance or a slight decrease in performance from the prior quarter. One servicer earned three stars - the highest rating - for each compliance metric, but was rated as needing “moderate improvement” due to lack of progress in implementing previously identified improvements. This quarter’s results indicate that some servicers need to improve accuracy and timeliness of identification and reporting of defaulted HAMP modifications. Permanent Modifications (Thousands) 80 3.5 70 60 3.0 50 40 2.5 Delinquent Loans (Millions) Quarterly Trending of MHA Permanent Modifications Started & Estimated Number of Loans 60+ Days Delinquent* 30 20 2.0 10 0 1.5 Q4 2013 HAMP TIER 1 NON-GSE Q1 2014 HAMP TIER 1 GSE Q2 2014 HAMP TIER 2 Q3 2014 GSE SAI Q4 2014 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 Q4 2014 QoQ % Change 1,755,572 60,266 3% HAMP Tier 1 1,363,468 17,946 -8% HAMP Tier 2 84,988 13,805 40% 236,268 12,970 -14% 70,848 15,545 11% 2MP Modifications Started 144,674 2,977 -33% HAFA Transactions Completed 341,154 17,867 -16% UP Forbearance Plans Started 42,142 671 -18% 2,283,542 81,781 -4% 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 Fourth Quarter 2014 HAMP Summary All Trials Started1 Tier 1 2,169,866 Tier 2 109,541 Active Trials 40,486 Trial Modifications Cancelled Since Verified Income Requirement* 91,108 Trial Modifications Permanent Modifications 2,279,407 All Permanent Modifications Started 1,448,456 Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)** 439,323 Active Permanent Modifications 968,202 * 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, 699,357 trials were cancelled, for a cumulative 790,465 trials cancelled program-to-date. ** Does not include 40,927 loans paid off and 4 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 Fourth Quarter 2014 Select HAMP Modification Characteristics Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated at approximately $32.7 billion, program-to-date, compared with unmodified mortgage obligations. HAMP modifications follow a series of waterfall steps that include capitalization, interest rate adjustment, term extension, and principal forbearance/forgiveness. HAMP has two evaluation tiers: • Under HAMP Tier 1, servicers apply the modification steps in sequence until the homeowner’s postmodification front-end debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is 31%. The impact of each modification step can vary to achieve the target of 31%. • Under HAMP Tier 2, servicers apply the modification steps simultaneously to achieve a post-modification DTI that falls within an allowable range (subject to investor restrictions). HAMP Tier 2 applies to non-GSE mortgages only. Homeowner Characteristics Modification Steps for Permanent Modifications All permanent modifications reflect some combination of the following modification steps: Tier 1 Tier 2 All $3,913 $5,110 $3,970 565 559 565 $144,000 $175,000 Modification Step Tier 1 Tier 2 All Interest Rate Reduction 95.9% 73.8% 94.6% Median Monthly Gross Income Term Extension 59.2% 74.7% 60.1% Median Credit Score Principal Forbearance 30.5% 32.2% 30.6% Median Property Value $176,670 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 44.0% 31.0% -13.5 pct pts Tier 2 28.2% 21.2% -6.4 pct pts All 43.4% 31.0% -12.9 pct pts • 24% were previously in a HAMP Tier 1 trial or permanent modification. • 13% 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 68.2% 51.2% -13.8 pct pts Tier 2 44.1% 36.7% -6.5 pct pts All 66.8% 50.1% -13.1 pct pts Median Monthly Housing Payment Tier 1 $1,390.87 $820.06 ($501.33) Tier 2 $1,065.11 $704.05 ($329.95) All $1,371.99 $813.34 ($487.60) 6 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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 $212. Number of Interest Rate Increases by Quarter* 180,000 160,000 Number of Loans 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 2016 2017 2017 2017 2017 2018 2018 2018 2018 2019 2019 2019 2019 First Increase Second Increase Third Increase Fourth Increase * As of December 2014. 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 Fourth Quarter 2014 Performance of HAMP Tier 1 Permanent Modifications Performance of HAMP modifications has improved over time. For modifications seasoned 24 months, 17.4% of modifications started in 2013 have disqualified, compared to 28.8% 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. # Months Post Modification 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 3 2.1% 1.7% 1.2% 1.0% 0.9% 1.0% 1.2% 1.2% 6 6.7% 6.7% 5.3% 4.3% 3.9% 3.9% 5.0% 4.8% 12 16.3% 15.6% 12.7% 10.4% 9.5% 9.7% 18 22.9% 22.7% 18.9% 15.3% 14.0% 19.8% 24 28.8% 28.0% 23.8% 19.1% 17.4% 25.2% 30 33.3% 32.6% 27.3% 22.8% 29.9% 36 37.6% 36.6% 30.0% 25.9% 34.1% 42 41.1% 39.3% 33.8% 38.0% 48 43.6% 41.6% 37.0% 41.6% 54 46.0% 44.2% 44.4% 60 47.9% 45.4% 46.9% % of Disqualified Modifications3 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 ALL 1.4% 1.1% 5.6% 13.3% 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% 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 Fourth Quarter 2014 Drivers of Performance The most significant factors driving HAMP Tier 1 modification performance are the amount of the reduction in the monthly mortgage payment, the length of the homeowner’s delinquency at the start of the trial modification, and the homeowner’s credit score at the time of modification. Performance by Monthly Payment Reduction Performance by Delinquency at Trial Start Payment reduction is strongly correlated with permanent modification sustainability. For modifications seasoned 24 months, only 15.2% of modifications with a monthly payment reduction greater than 50% have been disqualified due to missing three payments, compared to a disqualification rate of 39.7% where the payment had been cut by 20% or less. <=20% 20%-30% 40%-50% >50% Homeowners who were 31 to 90 days delinquent at the start of the HAMP trial period experienced a 23.0% redefault rate in the subsequent 24 months, compared to 29.0% for homeowners whose delinquency was between 121 and 210 days at trial start. <= 30 Days 121 - 210 Days 30%-40% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 12 18 24 30 36 12 42 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 580 - 619 620 - 660 24 30 36 42 Performance by Investor Modifications of private label security loans have the highest delinquency rates, followed by modifications of portfolio loans and GSE loans. Homeowners with credit scores between 580-619 at the time of modification experienced a 20.3% re-default rate in the subsequent 24 months, compared to a rate of 10.7% for homeowners whose credit scores were above 660. < 580 18 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification Performance by Credit Score at the Time of Modification GSE > 660 Portfolio Private 60% 60% 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 91 - 120 Days 60% 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 60% 31 - 90 Days > 210 Days 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 12 18 24 30 36 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 42 12 18 24 30 36 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 42 9 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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 other 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 15% 10% 5% Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu Foreclosure Starts Foreclosure Completions 9% 13% 13% 35% Source: Survey data from large servicers2 10 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 Treasury’s Hardest Hit State Assistance Programs: Interaction with HAMP Treasury’s Hardest Hit Fund (HHF) program provides $7.6 billion to 18 states and the District of Columbia to develop locally tailored programs to assist struggling homeowners in their communities. Unlike the MHA programs which are national in scope, the Hardest Hit Fund sought to address state-by-state differences in the housing crisis. Treasury designed HHF to capitalize on Housing Finance Agencies’ (HFAs’) on-the-ground understanding of the conditions in their communities to create programs they determine will most effectively help prevent foreclosures and stabilize housing markets. Since then, HFAs and Treasury have worked together to develop and implement 73 programs that are making a difference for homeowners throughout these hardest hit states. As housing markets, local economies, and industry dynamics evolve, Treasury, HFAs, servicers, and other stakeholders share best practices. HFAs continue to refine programs and outreach campaigns in order to increase the number of homeowners assisted and improve the quality of assistance provided to homeowners. HFAs combine HHF with HAMP when possible, and they engage housing counseling agencies to help homeowners access HAMP and other types of loan modifications, or other long-term foreclosure prevention solutions. Change in Housing Price Index (HPI) Decline from Peak to Q4 2014: (20%) or more (15%)-(19.9%) (10%)-(14.9%) (5%)-(9.9%) 0%-(4.9%) H Indicates HHF State Source: CoreLogic Home Price Index Report, December 2014 (HPI for Single Family including Distressed) How Do Treasury’s Hardest Hit Fund Programs Interact with MHA? • Every MHA homeowner Outreach Event in an HHF state included representatives from HHF-participating HFAs, who typically took applications from homeowners on site. • The Homeowner’s HOPE Hotline™ includes information about HHF assistance in its scripting. When a homeowner from an HHF state contacts the Hotline and is in need of assistance, he or she receives MHA and HHF assistance information and a referral to the state’s HFA. • Treasury provides guidance to servicers regarding HHF – HAMP interaction. • Treasury requires HFAs to describe how HHF and HAMP interact in their program term sheets. • HFAs have engaged housing counseling agencies and other means to help homeowners access HAMP since HHF’s inception. For further information on the Hardest Hit Fund please visit the website. 11 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) has broadened the use of principal reduction in mortgage modifications as a tool to help underwater homeowners. Servicers of non-GSE loans are required to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction under HAMP PRA for mortgages with a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio greater than 115% when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for principal reduction, they are not required to reduce principal as part of the modification. Under HAMP, servicers provide principal reduction on HAMP modifications in two ways: • Under HAMP PRA, principal is reduced to lower the LTV, the investor is eligible to receive an incentive on the amount of principal reduced, and the reduction vests over a 3-year period. • Servicers can also offer principal reduction to homeowners on a HAMP modification outside the requirements of HAMP PRA. If they do, the investor receives no incentive payment for the principal reduction and the principal reduction can be recognized immediately. HAMP Modifications with Earned Principal Reduction Under PRA4 HAMP Modifications with Upfront Principal Reduction Outside of PRA Total HAMP Modifications with Principal Reduction 172,585 135,281 48,714 38,404 221,299 173,685 $68,300 $54,713 $64,500 32.3% 18.0% 30.4% $15,466,767,271 $3,250,608,493 $18,717,375,764 Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible Loans All Permanent Modifications Started Active Permanent Modifications Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent Modifications Started5 Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent Modifications Started (%)6 Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Permanent Modifications Started5 90% 84% 80% 71% 70% 61% 60% 77% 71% 71% 65% 73% 60% 76% 40% 42% 73% 65% 70% 60% 69% 59% 71% 59% 69% 65% 52% 53% 50% 40% 65% 77% 46% 30% 20% Q4 2010 Q1 Q2 Q3 2011 2011 2011 Tier 1 PRA Q4 Q1 2011 2012 Tier 2 PRA Q2 2012 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 2012 2012 2013 2013 Tier 1 All Principal Reduction Q3 2013 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 Tier 2 All Principal Reduction Modification Characteristics: HAMP vs. HAMP with Principal Reduction All HAMP Modifications Permanent Modifications – Median LTV ratio: - Before Modification 117.7% - After Modification 115.0% Permanent Modifications – Median Before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio: - Front-End DTI 43.4% - Back-End DTI 66.8% Total HAMP Modifications with Principal Reduction 145.1% 113.1% 43.2% 55.7% 12 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 The Second Lien Modification Program The Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) provides additional assistance to homeowners in a first lien permanent modification who have an eligible second lien with a participating servicer, including second liens with a qualifying first lien modified under the GSEs’ Standard Modification program. This assistance can result in a modification of the second lien, as well as a full or partial extinguishment of the second lien. Second lien modifications follow a series of steps that may include capitalization, interest rate reduction, term extension, and principal forbearance or forgiveness. All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)* 144,674 Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 39,417 Active Second Lien Modifications** 84,927 Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments 10,874 * Includes 5,516 loans that have a qualifying first lien GSE Standard Modification. ** Includes 7,351 Loans in active non-payment status whereby the 1MP has disqualified from HAMP. As a result, the servicer is no longer required to report payment activity on the 2MP modification. 2MP Modification Characteristics Median Monthly Payment Reduction: Second lien official modifications Debt Extinguishment: HAMP homeowners receiving partial or full extinguishment Reduction on second lien only $153 Total Outstanding Principal Balance Extinguished Combined first and second lien reduction $763 Top Three States by Activity: Percent of Total 2MP Modifications Started % of total monthly payment 41% Second lien full extinguishments Combined first and second lien reduction % of total monthly payment $996 51% $3.0B California 34% Florida 10% New York 7% Estimated Eligible 2nd Liens7 2MP Participating Servicer Name 2MP Modifications Started Current Estimated Eligible 2nd Liens Bank of America 37,676 5,749 CitiMortgage 18,579 3,051 JPMorgan Chase 40,687 2,421 4,933 278 Wells Fargo Bank 22,203 3,467 Other Servicers 20,596 1,728 144,674 16,694 Nationstar Mortgage Total Note: Only five of the seven largest SPA servicers participate in 2MP. 13 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Program offers incentives and a streamlined process for homeowners looking to exit their homes or sell a rental property through a short sale or deed-in-lieu (DIL) of foreclosure. HAFA has established important homeowner protections and an industry standard for streamlined transactions. Effective November 2012, the GSEs revised their short sale and DIL programs, such that their Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s HAFA program. In HAFA transactions, homeowners who need to relocate: • Follow a streamlined process for short sales and deed-in-lieu transactions that requires no verification of income (unless required by investors) and allows for pre-approved short sale terms; • Receive a waiver of deficiency once the transaction is completed that releases the homeowner from remaining mortgage debt; and • Receive at least $3,000* in relocation assistance at closing. *Note: Beginning in February 2015, this assistance was increased to $10,000. HAFA Activity by Investor Type Participating servicers must consider all homeowners denied for HAMP for a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure through the HAFA program. However, individual investors can impose additional eligibility requirements. Private Short Sale GSE Total 123,520 44,988 135,159 303,667 4,652 3,266 29,569 37,487 128,172 48,254 164,728 341,154 Deed-in-Lieu Total Transactions Completed Portfolio Characteristics of Non-GSE HAFA Activity Non-GSE HAFA Debt Relief & Release of Subordinate Liens Through HAFA, homeowners can be relieved of significant unpaid principal balances. Median Unpaid Principal Balance Before HAFA $279,389 Median Sales Price $165,000 Median Debt Relief $126,235 Median Debt Relief as % of UPB Total Debt Relief (cumulative) 47% $23.9B In addition to satisfying the primary mortgage debt, as part of a HAFA short sale or deed-in-lieu the homeowner must be fully released from liability for subordinate liens. % of HAFA transactions completed that included release of a homeowner’s subordinate liens Total subordinate liens released (cumulative) In 15% of HAFA transactions completed, the homeowner began a HAMP trial modification but later requested a HAFA agreement or was disqualified from HAMP. Non-GSE HAFA Activity by State Top Three States by HAFA Activity: % of HAFA Transactions Completed California 37% Florida 17% Arizona 5% 41% $441M 14 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 The Home Affordable Unemployment Program The Home Affordable Unemployment Program (UP) provides assistance to homeowners who are unable to make their mortgage payments as a result of unemployment. Unemployed homeowners can receive 12 months of forbearance, during which mortgage payments are reduced or suspended, allowing homeowners to seek employment without fear that they will lose their homes to foreclosure. All UP Forbearance Plans Started 42,142 UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 35,818 UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 6,324 UP Activity by State Top Three States by UP Activity: % of UP Forbearance Plans Started California 25% Florida 7% Illinois 5% Status of Homeowners Who Completed an UP Forbearance Plan 4% 30% 1% 2% Foreclosure Started 17% Foreclosure Completed Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu 1% Alternative Modification / Payment Plan UP Forbearance Plan Extension New HAMP Trial Borrower Current / Loan Paid Off 21% Other* 24% *Other dispositions include Bankruptcy, Charge-Off, and Action Pending 15 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 Making Home Affordable Program Activity by Servicer As of December 2014, there are 125 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 102,694 2,468 6,292 37,676 47,788 55,343 4,032 4,596 18,579 1,578 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 186,503 1,711 25,403 40,687 36,454 Nationstar Mortgage LLC 136,806 10,022 8,775 4,933 6,838 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 260,041 34,594 73,794 N/A 18,543 76,773 10,343 12,108 N/A 14,446 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 195,985 7,085 29,674 22,203 32,207 Other Servicers 349,323 14,733 11,943 20,596 18,572 1,363,468 84,988 172,585 144,674 176,426 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. 40,666 45,976 18,520 105,162 CitiMortgage, Inc. 31,715 8,484 19,176 59,375 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 86,374 59,009 42,831 188,214 Nationstar Mortgage LLC 81,965 60,691 4,172 146,828 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 55,693 216,776 22,166 294,635 670 79,821 6,625 87,116 79,620 42,403 81,047 203,070 Other Servicers 261,481 47,310 55,265 364,056 Total 638,184 560,470 249,802 1,448,456 Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 16 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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. 17 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 4th Quarter 2014 Servicer Assessment Summary Results Improvement Needed Minor Servicer Name Bank of America, N.A. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Moderate Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC* Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. 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 assessments provided in this report are based on the results of compliance reviews completed by MHA-C with respect to the fourth quarter of 2014. Ocwen has reported that certain letters to borrowers were erroneously dated. Treasury continues to review any impact of this matter on MHA programs. 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. 18 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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% 19 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 4th 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% 1.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.8% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Result 0.0% 3.7% 0.0% 3.0% 4.7% 0.6% 8.8% Rating *** ** *** ** *** *** * Servicer Result 0.0% 0.9% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Result 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 3.0% 2.3% 0.2% 6.8% Rating *** *** *** ** *** *** ** Servicer Result 0.0% 0.5% 0.5% 1.0% 3.3% 0.6% 3.8% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Result 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 2.0% 1.8% 2.2% 0.8% Rating *** ** *** *** *** ** *** Servicer Result 6.7% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 4.5% 0.8% 6.8% Rating ** *** *** *** *** *** ** 20 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 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% 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% 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% N/A 1.7% 1.6% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 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% 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% 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% Second Look Unable to Determine % Bank of America 18.8% 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% 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% JPMorgan Chase 11.3% 3.2% 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% N/A 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 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% 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% 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% Income Calculation Error % Bank of America 22.0% 13.2% 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% 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% JPMorgan Chase 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 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% N/A 3.0% 3.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 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% 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% Wells Fargo 27.0% 4.4% 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% 21 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 Program Results Trials Aged 6+ Months (% of Active Trials)10 40% Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 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. Q1’14 722 550 672 1,183 2,969 1,733 1,001 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 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. 60 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 50 # Days 40 30 20 10 0 Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase N.A. Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Wells Fargo Bank, Servicing, Inc. N.A. 22 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Fourth Quarter 2014 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. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Bank of America, CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase N.A. Bank, N.A. Q3 2014 Nationstar Mortgage LLC Q4 2014 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% Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 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. 23 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 December 2014. 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. 24 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 December 2014. 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. 25 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes 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. 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. 26 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Compliance Metrics Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance: Servicers are required to assign certain delinquent homeowners to a Single Point of Contact (SPOC). This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a SPOC to a homeowner in a timely fashion and otherwise in accordance with MHA guidelines. For SPOC Assignment Noncompliance results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: assigning a SPOC to the homeowner, and correcting system and operational processes such that SPOCs are properly assigned to homeowners in a timely fashion. Second Look % 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. 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. 27 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes 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. 28 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 Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer performed accurate analysis of borrower escrow to use in modification Property Valuation (AVM, BPO) obtained Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer obtained appraisal or broker price opinion for the property 29 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes 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 Core Eligibility/Incentive TPP to Perm. Mod. 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 Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer sends accurate second notice of Interest Rate Increase between 60 and 75 days prior to rate increase Accuracy of step rate increases Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately calculates and implements HAMP rate increases 30 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes 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 Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer, Borrower & Investor Incentive compensation for second lien modifications is accurate Accurate reporting of 2MP Trials/Perm Mods to IR2 Core Eligibility/Incentive 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 Core Eligibility/Incentive activity to IR2 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 31 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. 32 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 11,366 OMRs for modifications that have aged up to or through 60 months, or 1.2% 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 46.5% and 46.9%. 4 Other MHA Programs 5 Other MHA Programs 6 Other MHA Programs 1 2 Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA. Under HAMP PRA, principal reduction vests over a 3-year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount that may be forgiven. Principal amount reduced as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization. 7 Other MHA Programs Based on survey data as reported by servicers. One important factor affecting the size of the population of second liens eligible for 2MP modifications is that servicer participation in 2MP is voluntary. Under 2MP, participating servicers are notified when a match is found between one of their second liens and a qualifying first lien modification. Survey data indicates that program to date, 358,248 qualifying first lien modifications have been matched with a second lien. Of these matched second liens, approximately 55% are found to be ineligible for a 2MP modification. The most common reasons for ineligibility are: cancellation or failure of a trial or permanent first lien HAMP modification; extinguishment of the second lien prior to evaluation for 2MP; failure of a 2MP trial modification; and some homeowners with eligible second liens decline to participate in 2MP. 8 Servicer While both GSE and non-GSE loans are eligible for HAMP, at the present time due to GSE policy, servicers can only offer PRA on non-GSE modifications under HAMP. Servicer volume can vary based on the investor composition of the servicer’s portfolio and respective policy with regards to PRA. 9 Servicer Includes non-GSE activity under the MHA program only. Servicer GSE program data not available. Servicer These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to permanent modifications, but not reported as such in the HAMP system of record. Additionally, servicers may process cancellations of permanent modifications for reasons, including but not limited to, data corrections, loan repurchase agreements, etc. This process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with re-boarding of some of these permanent modifications in subsequent reporting periods. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, these modifications are reported as Active Trials. These modifications may be 6 months or more beyond their first trial payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trials. As a result, fluctuations are expected in this population. 10 33 Appendix 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 1,229 15,935 6,243 90,592 490,436 30,758 30,851 4,053 7,474 282,844 87,362 8,267 6,888 8,539 118,555 24,980 6,645 10,222 15,635 52,083 73,878 6,620 68,657 35,961 26,710 9,750 2,770 46,850 469 3,702 10,054 79,040 8,206 52,526 114,520 56,221 7,180 25,155 55,847 10,780 24,434 1,006 27,603 77,239 18,714 53,613 1,974 46,766 23,271 3,513 1,182 5,562 2,279,407 Permanent Modifications Started Median Monthly Payment Reduction 685 9,323 3,557 53,325 333,814 19,262 20,279 2,526 4,778 178,465 53,016 5,402 3,903 5,229 76,773 15,053 3,778 6,093 9,433 34,956 47,821 4,457 41,624 22,036 15,700 5,912 1,593 28,290 238 2,203 6,631 51,352 5,032 31,845 75,088 32,392 3,955 15,729 34,952 7,282 14,487 543 16,873 43,449 11,928 33,471 1,370 30,613 14,741 2,048 709 4,418 1,448,456 $477.13 $261.55 $247.48 $441.84 $716.72 $407.92 $529.40 $549.62 $409.87 $471.49 $360.61 $795.58 $247.67 $368.39 $507.26 $259.13 $288.10 $264.59 $283.23 $582.48 $568.26 $387.93 $341.93 $419.14 $292.60 $251.48 $398.26 $303.27 $275.80 $260.10 $466.68 $632.05 $348.52 $527.17 $791.55 $289.15 $244.46 $456.69 $346.05 $539.93 $297.42 $259.26 $285.04 $284.67 $430.89 $486.17 $363.40 $505.33 $345.93 $308.56 $356.56 $288.64 $487.60 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 31% 31% 31% 37% 37% 33% 37% 32% 32% 40% 36% 34% 32% 33% 40% 33% 32% 33% 32% 35% 34% 35% 37% 35% 34% 32% 32% 33% 31% 33% 34% 37% 33% 38% 39% 35% 32% 34% 33% 39% 32% 29% 34% 33% 32% 32% 33% 33% 35% 29% 29% 37% 36% 34 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 Final Monthly P&I Payment P&I Payment Payment Increase at Increase after All Reduction from First Interest Increases Pre-Mod P&I Rate Increase AK 44.83% 6.8% $1,484.78 $4,201.75 $216,259.76 $866.97 $93.32 $181.86 -$399.74 AL 46.45% 6.8% $876.68 $2,295.07 $121,240.44 $515.11 $49.18 $100.48 -$229.51 AR 45.31% 6.5% $809.17 $2,142.78 $115,395.44 $473.35 $48.93 $102.31 -$199.43 AZ 49.17% 6.4% $1,195.43 $2,824.17 $179,014.68 $675.03 $79.54 $193.92 -$289.74 CA 48.58% 6.1% $1,943.35 $4,690.79 $306,949.64 $1,096.74 $138.21 $318.23 -$434.95 CO 46.23% 6.4% $1,238.25 $3,203.96 $189,721.86 $757.13 $81.64 $181.92 -$275.86 CT 45.36% 6.5% $1,463.94 $4,341.45 $211,284.98 $807.84 $92.86 $204.79 -$385.41 DC 47.91% 6.4% $1,711.06 $4,119.25 $275,733.70 $995.62 $122.54 $275.55 -$367.17 DE 46.95% 6.5% $1,289.27 $3,121.75 $197,096.91 $771.07 $84.21 $178.80 -$297.88 FL 47.57% 6.5% $1,194.07 $3,277.00 $170,777.72 $630.38 $75.96 $172.74 -$332.61 GA 47.30% 6.5% $1,008.39 $2,655.22 $144,255.02 $572.69 $62.59 $141.24 -$268.80 HI 48.85% 6.3% $2,416.54 $5,368.51 $392,422.21 $1,400.24 $175.57 $381.45 -$488.41 IA 44.18% 6.6% $781.85 $2,319.42 $109,543.47 $441.73 $46.25 $96.21 -$200.18 ID 48.33% 6.5% $1,145.59 $2,734.66 $171,523.75 $669.96 $74.84 $166.16 -$270.87 IL 46.91% 6.5% $1,283.85 $3,730.33 $180,162.64 $664.03 $80.20 $183.20 -$371.16 IN 45.96% 6.8% $817.93 $2,166.67 $110,833.76 $466.22 $45.70 $97.29 -$215.22 KS 44.33% 6.6% $903.83 $2,733.25 $126,880.66 $512.54 $51.64 $111.88 -$230.88 KY 45.51% 6.8% $809.39 $2,212.89 $112,193.09 $469.27 $46.73 $98.55 -$209.66 LA 45.48% 6.9% $904.57 $2,582.85 $125,661.40 $514.45 $52.28 $105.94 -$244.47 MA 46.90% 6.4% $1,664.50 $4,356.82 $250,706.82 $944.04 $110.37 $245.91 -$399.53 MD 46.75% 6.4% $1,672.11 $4,333.33 $259,840.95 $962.86 $115.47 $258.58 -$385.64 ME 46.41% 6.6% $1,137.84 $3,028.57 $164,723.20 $640.02 $71.46 $149.97 -$288.29 MI 46.71% 6.5% $958.87 $2,686.89 $130,584.11 $524.67 $55.66 $127.17 -$260.40 MN 45.95% 6.3% $1,207.25 $3,317.26 $179,486.77 $697.54 $78.06 $180.09 -$289.49 MO 45.86% 6.6% $886.97 $2,499.13 $124,683.83 $501.21 $52.85 $112.37 -$239.14 MS 46.09% 6.9% $821.52 $2,241.72 $112,469.91 $460.77 $45.79 $92.51 -$227.71 MT 46.56% 6.4% $1,262.50 $3,260.09 $193,934.45 $740.97 $82.33 $176.54 -$298.76 NC 46.17% 6.5% $956.01 $2,534.96 $135,720.34 $557.14 $57.42 $120.30 -$242.66 ND 41.98% 6.6% $891.55 $2,989.00 $136,122.49 $566.10 $57.21 $120.33 -$198.13 NE 43.69% 6.7% $796.13 $2,522.00 $110,574.91 $464.81 $46.82 $94.59 -$212.89 NH 44.00% 6.4% $1,354.98 $4,165.00 $199,945.91 $780.22 $85.96 $186.43 -$330.97 35 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 Final Monthly P&I Payment P&I Payment Payment Increase at Increase after All Reduction from First Interest Increases Pre-Mod P&I Rate Increase NJ 45.24% 6.4% $1,716.18 $5,238.42 $251,950.00 $913.75 $112.29 $246.45 -$447.06 NM 47.05% 6.5% $1,065.15 $2,760.14 $157,388.11 $630.98 $68.33 $147.45 -$271.74 NV 49.98% 6.3% $1,372.39 $3,138.91 $208,030.85 $760.00 $93.02 $222.71 -$337.41 NY 47.22% 6.5% $2,088.16 $5,683.57 $311,238.13 $1,113.65 $139.64 $305.93 -$547.02 OH 45.29% 6.6% $825.07 $2,416.00 $112,127.01 $463.42 $46.78 $104.10 -$221.58 OK 44.61% 6.9% $785.66 $2,384.82 $107,695.12 $453.44 $43.92 $90.06 -$214.27 OR 46.56% 6.4% $1,330.43 $3,466.66 $207,428.11 $789.35 $91.71 $201.96 -$310.06 PA 45.11% 6.6% $1,099.80 $3,230.54 $154,499.56 $611.44 $65.72 $136.00 -$284.27 RI 47.45% 6.4% $1,369.48 $3,658.33 $197,608.74 $737.73 $87.91 $202.61 -$374.25 SC 46.51% 6.6% $970.22 $2,528.11 $138,526.84 $565.32 $58.64 $123.55 -$242.34 SD 44.25% 6.4% $941.36 $2,711.56 $136,237.91 $527.65 $57.55 $127.50 -$213.42 TN 46.81% 6.9% $884.75 $2,323.98 $120,077.94 $501.31 $49.40 $104.01 -$247.51 TX 43.14% 6.9% $867.15 $2,980.62 $120,043.85 $504.58 $49.96 $103.27 -$236.77 UT 47.23% 6.5% $1,368.96 $3,293.00 $211,600.04 $818.64 $93.39 $210.06 -$303.45 VA 46.47% 6.4% $1,596.73 $4,072.69 $249,116.96 $930.76 $109.12 $244.10 -$330.58 VT 45.91% 6.7% $1,132.79 $3,120.00 $168,109.94 $640.02 $72.39 $159.15 -$290.31 WA 46.35% 6.4% $1,517.72 $3,986.67 $241,988.24 $894.05 $107.42 $234.39 -$334.24 WI 44.89% 6.5% $990.96 $3,005.34 $139,435.45 $552.70 $59.78 $128.60 -$264.28 WV 46.40% 6.6% $1,081.87 $2,667.50 $155,018.29 $632.44 $64.62 $127.20 -$250.16 WY 46.10% 6.5% $1,305.74 $3,296.01 $190,755.07 $807.14 $81.15 $161.65 -$289.64 PR 50.75% 6.4% $773.44 $1,663.00 $103,960.37 $447.92 $44.19 $95.54 -$210.57 6.4% $1,447.38 $3,805.49 $214,983.73 $802.59 $94.61 $211.56 -$345.30 Nation47.19% wide* * Includes U.S. Territories 36 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 3,584 10.7% 2009Q4 43,682 5.7% 2010Q1 123,952 2010Q2 147,607 2010Q3 12 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 4.5% 4,417 15.8% 1.9% 47,523 10.2% 4.3% 1.5% 150,254 5.3% 1.8% 157,240 86,243 5.1% 1.9% 2010Q4 58,040 4.6% 2011Q1 70,922 2.8% 2011Q2 79,855 2011Q3 18 # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 10.6% 4,636 25.9% 6.3% 51,422 20.4% 10.4% 6.1% 161,162 12.3% 7.5% 173,512 95,950 11.1% 7.1% 1.8% 62,468 8.9% 1.0% 75,941 8.2% 3.7% 1.3% 89,119 80,846 3.7% 1.3% 2011Q4 64,882 3.4% 2012Q1 49,368 2012Q2 90+ Days 21.2% 4,967 32.3% 29.0% 15.8% 54,604 25.4% 22.4% 20.3% 16.1% 166,187 26.0% 22.4% 19.5% 16.1% 170,700 27.8% 24.1% 104,225 18.2% 14.5% 106,202 25.3% 21.9% 5.8% 65,090 18.4% 14.5% 66,643 24.0% 21.1% 5.0% 79,648 17.0% 13.6% 81,250 22.2% 19.2% 9.4% 5.8% 92,600 16.2% 13.2% 91,880 23.1% 20.1% 85,922 8.8% 5.6% 86,873 15.6% 12.3% 86,624 21.8% 18.9% 1.2% 67,405 6.9% 4.4% 67,738 14.7% 11.4% 67,890 19.3% 16.8% 2.5% 0.9% 50,814 6.8% 4.1% 50,849 14.1% 10.9% 50,238 18.5% 15.8% 43,975 3.0% 1.0% 44,956 7.7% 4.6% 45,237 13.6% 10.9% 44,767 18.9% 16.1% 2012Q3 47,280 3.1% 1.0% 48,960 7.4% 4.6% 49,701 13.0% 10.1% 50,232 17.9% 15.1% 2012Q4 39,290 3.2% 1.1% 41,206 6.3% 4.0% 42,426 12.3% 9.4% 42,695 16.3% 14.1% 2013Q1 39,249 2.3% 0.7% 40,907 6.1% 3.5% 42,040 12.7% 9.7% 42,420 16.6% 14.0% 2013Q2 31,553 2.7% 0.8% 33,026 6.6% 3.9% 33,719 11.8% 9.4% 33,983 16.5% 14.0% 2013Q3 31,978 3.0% 1.1% 33,453 7.1% 4.3% 34,851 12.2% 9.3% 11,112 17.0% 14.3% 2013Q4 27,324 3.1% 1.1% 28,651 6.4% 4.0% 29,935 12.4% 9.6% 2014Q1 23,695 2.6% 1.0% 25,580 6.9% 3.9% 8,681 12.5% 9.7% 2014Q2 19,025 3.7% 1.2% 19,835 7.7% 5.0% 2014Q3 17,015 3.5% 1.2% 6,021 7.7% 4.8% 2014Q4 5,248 3.3% 1.1% All 1,134,613 3.9% 1.4% 1,209,648 9.0% 5.6% 1,224,345 16.7% 13.3% 1,172,394 22.9% 19.8% Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 24 Mod. Effective in: 36 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 2009Q3 5,070 36.9% 2009Q4 55,561 31.6% 2010Q1 167,979 2010Q2 178,832 2010Q3 2010Q4 42 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 33.6% 5,169 44.0% 28.4% 56,375 39.7% 31.9% 28.7% 166,240 31.1% 28.7% 175,052 106,257 29.5% 26.8% 66,406 29.6% 26.6% 2011Q1 80,896 27.5% 2011Q2 91,469 2011Q3 60 # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 41.8% 5,052 48.5% 37.2% 56,189 42.3% 39.7% 37.4% 165,131 39.2% 37.4% 175,175 104,558 37.2% 35.3% 65,936 36.4% 34.3% 24.8% 81,055 33.8% 27.3% 25.1% 91,555 85,108 25.8% 23.5% 2011Q4 67,626 23.4% 2012Q1 50,752 2012Q2 44,978 2012Q3 2012Q4 2013Q1 90+ Days 46.4% 5,061 54.1% 52.6% 40.6% 55,392 48.9% 47.5% 42.4% 40.5% 38,409 46.8% 45.4% 41.9% 40.1% 105,013 39.7% 37.8% 66,246 38.3% 36.7% 31.8% 81,273 35.7% 34.1% 33.2% 31.6% 91,659 35.5% 33.9% 86,868 31.1% 29.2% 30,881 34.2% 32.6% 21.1% 67,749 28.6% 26.8% 22.5% 20.0% 17,021 28.0% 25.9% 22.1% 20.0% 50,500 20.9% 18.6% 42,821 19.9% 17.6% 13,379 19.7% 17.4% 1,107,634 27.8% 25.2% 917,578 36.1% 34.1% 776,619 39.7% 38.0% 98,862 48.3% 46.9% 2013Q2 2013Q3 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 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. 37 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 Permanent Modifications Started 67 184 2,495 301 222 1,707 3,306 162 4,036 140 138 61 532 114 208 1,171 175 359 141 1,282 547 42,194 2,350 249 952 2,763 8,013 15,923 368 1,783 2,249 427 273 316 57 610 1,240 152 252 3,477 51 170 142 208 68 42 2,961 24,466 626 169 949 6,269 517 250 1,530 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $196.03 $258.00 $297.58 $249.63 $352.68 $360.74 $338.44 $243.54 $405.12 $215.34 $262.54 $277.41 $504.25 $180.26 $214.23 $419.72 $207.77 $320.38 $262.06 $351.10 $307.41 $378.70 $496.49 $283.75 $261.84 $331.05 $478.23 $475.74 $311.37 $616.10 $262.13 $264.73 $226.76 $225.43 $217.17 $478.62 $535.79 $291.84 $247.80 $281.26 $339.62 $302.78 $347.41 $267.66 $202.45 $250.95 $383.27 $628.02 $479.32 $243.77 $476.27 $716.25 $232.05 $336.14 $258.96 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 33% 36% 36% 31% 34% 34% 33% 29% 34% 31% 36% 32% 32% 27% 26% 35% 29% 35% 36% 33% 33% 37% 38% 29% 32% 33% 37% 32% 34% 36% 30% 37% 34% 33% 35% 34% 37% 27% 36% 32% 34% 29% 41% 31% 24% 39% 34% 36% 34% 34% 31% 40% 34% 34% 34% 38 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan Statistical Area California-Lexington Park, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Canton-Massillon, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Carbondale-Marion, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Carson City, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Casper, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area Cedar Rapids, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Chambersburg-Waynesboro, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Champaign-Urbana, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Charleston, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Charlottesville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Chattanooga, TN-GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Cheyenne, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Chico, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Clarksville, TN-KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland-Elyria, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Coeur d'Alene, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area College Station-Bryan, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Colorado Springs, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbia, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, GA-AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Corpus Christi, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Corvallis, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-Destin, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Cumberland, MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Dalton, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Danville, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Danville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Dayton, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Decatur, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Decatur, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Dothan, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Dover, DE Metropolitan Statistical Area Dubuque, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Duluth, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area East Stroudsburg, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 405 427 318 1,228 5,038 111 50 399 128 333 237 201 167 3,004 9,610 608 1,371 137 74,139 1,111 5,889 245 226 8,177 650 128 2,019 166 2,440 711 118 5,270 364 105 835 138 14,603 489 48 53 379 543 1,996 178 87 5,556 11,797 1,412 24,633 183 871 105 669 1,314 1,107 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $258.77 $416.69 $557.26 $262.89 $478.41 $231.07 $282.69 $529.45 $340.47 $251.76 $349.29 $242.83 $222.46 $355.47 $318.44 $392.46 $273.30 $272.90 $519.02 $459.66 $308.91 $222.46 $261.10 $306.53 $412.43 $221.07 $391.03 $243.79 $268.12 $267.34 $224.59 $322.18 $247.71 $348.52 $422.07 $246.68 $300.53 $260.32 $203.56 $172.03 $356.17 $240.88 $263.14 $233.12 $206.29 $394.00 $408.13 $271.57 $377.34 $214.12 $400.63 $266.07 $283.89 $322.13 $498.07 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 31% 35% 32% 34% 40% 31% 45% 37% 29% 31% 32% 30% 33% 33% 33% 31% 34% 27% 41% 34% 34% 30% 32% 37% 33% 27% 33% 32% 32% 32% 32% 35% 32% 26% 36% 30% 33% 34% 37% 23% 35% 35% 35% 28% 36% 38% 33% 31% 38% 30% 30% 37% 33% 34% 41% 39 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Eau Claire, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area El Centro, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Elizabethtown-Fort Knox, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Elkhart-Goshen, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Elmira, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Erie, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Eugene, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Evansville, IN-KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Fairbanks, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area Fajardo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Fargo, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Farmington, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Flagstaff, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Flint, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Florence, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Fond du Lac, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Fort Collins, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Fort Smith, AR-OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Fort Wayne, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Fresno, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Gadsden, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Gainesville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Gainesville, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Gettysburg, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Glens Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Forks, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Island, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Junction, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Grants Pass, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Great Falls, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Green Bay, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Greensboro-High Point, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Greenville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Guayama, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Gulfport-Biloxi-Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Hammond, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Harrisonburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Hattiesburg, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Hilton Head Island-Bluffton-Beaufort, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Hinesville, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Holland-Grand Haven, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Homosassa Springs, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 237 1,455 1,267 127 589 108 356 1,139 421 65 15 172 116 618 1,201 320 1,752 469 150 162 844 235 840 8,604 162 674 1,124 229 323 157 60 32 558 2,941 312 77 1,084 573 2,448 347 2,100 40 710 1,585 196 897 1,058 241 5,425 229 1,010 559 118 238 409 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $294.83 $441.37 $247.94 $238.72 $253.32 $271.55 $239.63 $394.20 $208.85 $339.78 $208.03 $280.57 $284.24 $233.45 $286.41 $526.70 $320.73 $220.87 $210.17 $295.97 $409.07 $215.61 $242.77 $481.23 $224.26 $335.57 $331.55 $443.59 $333.55 $237.42 $225.75 $230.84 $418.38 $287.22 $560.87 $261.72 $358.67 $346.76 $284.79 $270.54 $266.15 $188.52 $283.43 $423.72 $308.28 $425.12 $315.20 $408.72 $452.04 $238.40 $243.80 $520.03 $240.45 $256.51 $364.45 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 32% 35% 33% 30% 32% 40% 37% 33% 31% 23% 27% 30% 26% 33% 33% 34% 37% 30% 33% 34% 31% 30% 35% 37% 30% 35% 36% 36% 36% 33% 29% 33% 33% 34% 41% 29% 30% 37% 33% 33% 32% 34% 35% 32% 35% 34% 32% 34% 35% 31% 31% 41% 31% 27% 42% 40 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area Hot Springs, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Houma-Thibodaux, LA 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 Permanent Modifications Started 788 142 247 15,723 298 612 289 5,248 104 51 607 1,632 282 9,733 161 572 151 248 96 73 225 852 829 418 5,678 346 249 342 910 1,699 221 144 81 554 165 254 1,263 4,365 1,043 1,496 494 341 26,098 154 95 255 96 322 791 193 359 1,094 203 129 410 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $640.33 $328.31 $244.82 $287.33 $238.00 $237.56 $260.09 $275.29 $309.38 $343.54 $284.47 $250.11 $231.66 $371.66 $257.85 $266.04 $211.37 $253.89 $192.26 $241.62 $200.28 $1,069.96 $305.70 $344.58 $312.84 $265.73 $220.19 $233.02 $496.04 $263.10 $218.38 $263.15 $207.52 $240.38 $277.53 $233.47 $409.56 $370.77 $311.30 $313.98 $289.93 $327.50 $529.83 $315.24 $212.35 $304.01 $259.64 $332.26 $295.06 $244.04 $265.02 $242.53 $320.23 $232.60 $382.14 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 26% 36% 30% 34% 34% 29% 25% 32% 31% 34% 35% 32% 32% 35% 27% 34% 30% 32% 28% 33% 31% 40% 37% 36% 34% 31% 29% 33% 38% 31% 32% 29% 25% 30% 36% 32% 36% 36% 30% 35% 36% 30% 39% 31% 32% 31% 26% 34% 34% 38% 32% 31% 28% 33% 33% 41 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA 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 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 Permanent Modifications Started 81,467 23,633 3,065 163 434 823 1,648 1,176 2,085 61 150 296 79 1,140 1,201 6,856 2,407 75,759 326 94 66 5,643 18,147 241 1,158 6,557 208 736 788 48 256 478 171 586 1,710 1,112 2,411 4,931 109 5,315 4,054 102,041 464 5,172 1,355 2,388 559 53 1,777 1,721 1,015 1,689 25,928 267 110 7,327 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $854.59 $677.12 $264.88 $231.12 $248.76 $277.28 $511.23 $396.43 $480.04 $336.58 $301.79 $237.93 $237.80 $253.19 $462.62 $297.73 $533.82 $546.88 $253.89 $304.10 $253.11 $360.08 $450.46 $408.46 $259.93 $568.56 $210.99 $354.54 $233.12 $379.46 $259.68 $517.29 $198.38 $244.76 $391.17 $833.33 $616.66 $311.58 $350.05 $479.88 $335.22 $814.77 $266.62 $476.10 $486.43 $363.35 $476.45 $203.44 $360.54 $257.02 $440.89 $271.09 $460.20 $278.55 $196.89 $843.24 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 40% 31% 33% 32% 27% 36% 38% 34% 33% 31% 30% 34% 37% 34% 35% 36% 38% 42% 33% 41% 30% 37% 36% 31% 35% 37% 27% 35% 29% 38% 32% 37% 31% 36% 37% 36% 42% 32% 42% 36% 35% 40% 33% 40% 37% 37% 33% 29% 28% 32% 32% 33% 39% 35% 32% 36% 42 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA 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 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 Permanent Modifications Started 4,399 365 614 98 155 1,594 426 26,782 42,101 74 3,995 230 158 179 5,055 2,462 10,916 1,636 1,324 10,543 2,505 580 1,213 728 3,403 147 1,298 1,104 3,899 5,526 66,032 705 399 1,561 1,365 357 174 22,309 444 1,590 3,356 1,332 5,615 52 3,191 23,601 28,747 78 9,204 3,622 1,520 71 564 1,465 600 2,015 3,978 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $400.43 $335.61 $387.26 $184.53 $215.69 $310.01 $220.86 $403.15 $459.92 $213.53 $266.94 $330.76 $255.23 $245.91 $461.80 $444.33 $482.18 $497.21 $444.78 $541.14 $462.81 $263.55 $445.61 $354.80 $342.72 $319.86 $342.07 $444.27 $524.82 $371.47 $641.47 $275.24 $324.64 $266.67 $326.03 $251.86 $237.50 $612.54 $257.94 $384.77 $875.40 $430.21 $424.56 $182.47 $257.46 $767.33 $877.87 $238.91 $968.15 $302.07 $774.71 $217.31 $592.46 $982.72 $523.78 $775.78 $811.58 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 38% 28% 36% 29% 26% 34% 33% 33% 37% 31% 34% 32% 31% 39% 39% 35% 35% 31% 36% 38% 32% 33% 41% 36% 32% 34% 32% 33% 36% 32% 37% 31% 33% 36% 38% 35% 30% 36% 35% 34% 40% 35% 33% 26% 32% 36% 38% 33% 37% 38% 37% 27% 30% 38% 35% 40% 37% 43 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA 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 Sebring, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Sheboygan, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Sherman-Denison, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Shreveport-Bossier City, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sierra Vista-Douglas, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Sioux City, IA-NE-SD Metropolitan Statistical Area Sioux Falls, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Spokane-Spokane Valley, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Springfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area St. Cloud, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area St. George, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area St. Joseph, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area St. Louis, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area State College, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Staunton-Waynesboro, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV MSA Stockton-Lodi, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sumter, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Tallahassee, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Terre Haute, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Texarkana, TX-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area The Villages, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Topeka, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Trenton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Tucson, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Tuscaloosa, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Tyler, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Urban Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area Utica-Rome, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Valdosta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Victoria, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Vineland-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Visalia-Porterville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Waco, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Walla Walla, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Warner Robins, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Watertown-Fort Drum, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Wausau, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Wenatchee, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 1,252 1,315 19,714 1,110 307 209 161 736 183 180 241 949 840 1,540 181 2,620 744 320 481 1,032 172 10,527 134 154 49 9,264 197 742 1,243 21,716 171 90 147 2,101 268 1,571 5,892 1,398 327 212 1,892 328 193 6,262 39 683 6,782 3,758 177 74 302 46,837 201 38 189 87 285 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $324.69 $284.71 $562.53 $408.42 $411.23 $271.74 $228.31 $238.64 $324.51 $237.19 $226.49 $251.46 $246.99 $328.79 $244.10 $369.06 $262.65 $259.54 $324.83 $539.91 $252.74 $302.38 $367.67 $399.05 $136.29 $653.86 $224.13 $260.39 $330.39 $408.29 $224.53 $199.42 $425.76 $256.44 $221.76 $486.71 $367.53 $249.76 $287.06 $311.84 $830.72 $246.96 $284.98 $734.57 $251.86 $362.74 $394.23 $424.30 $208.46 $353.41 $274.33 $644.15 $207.31 $266.06 $303.68 $240.95 $363.29 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 34% 35% 34% 39% 44% 30% 31% 31% 34% 35% 26% 35% 31% 32% 35% 34% 33% 38% 31% 37% 36% 35% 35% 38% 22% 38% 33% 35% 31% 38% 37% 29% 42% 35% 28% 37% 35% 32% 31% 35% 34% 34% 31% 37% 35% 35% 31% 36% 32% 35% 33% 35% 33% 33% 36% 37% 29% 44 Appendix 7: HAMP Activity by MSA 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 117 61 763 143 1,105 793 1,701 5,354 398 5 1,613 1,256 1,408 1,169 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $171.48 $188.96 $238.30 $206.40 $379.39 $455.97 $273.75 $507.74 $279.80 $188.51 $367.80 $253.99 $501.17 $338.21 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 29% 33% 33% 28% 34% 31% 33% 36% 31% 29% 32% 36% 36% 35% 45
@FedFRASER