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 Third Quarter 2016 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REPORT THROUGH THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2016 MHA AT-A-GLANCE More than 2.7 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions have taken place under Making Home Affordable (MHA) programs Treasury recently published two new installments in its ongoing Key Findings and Lessons Learned Series: “The Effect of the Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) on Redefault Rates in the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP)” and the “Importance of Debt-to-Income Ratio for Modified Loan Performance”. (See page 4 for more details) QUARTERLY PROGRAM VOLUMES FOR THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2016 (Months of July, August, and September) 1MP Q3: 44.9K PTD: 2.1M See Page 4 2MP Q3: 2.3K PTD: 161K See Page 11 HAFA UP Q3: 13.2K PTD: 443K Q3: 0.1K PTD: 46K See Page 12 See Page 12 THIRD QUARTER 2016 SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS SERVICER MINOR IMPROVEMENT NEEDED Bank of America, N.A. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT NEEDED CitiMortgage, Inc. MODERATE IMPROVEMENT NEEDED Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. See page 14 for additional information and detailed results for this quarter. 2 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Table of Contents PROGRAM UPDATES MHA Updates 4 HAMP PROGRAM RESULTS: HAMP Summary HAMP Modification Characteristics HAMP Tier 1 Payment Adjustment Summary Performance of HAMP Permanent Modifications Homeowners with Disqualified Modifications 5 6 7 8-9 9 OTHER MHA PROGRAMS: Post-Modification Counseling Principal Reduction Alternative/2MP Program HAFA Program/Unemployment Program 10 11 12 RESULTS BY SERVICER: MHA Program Activity by Servicer and Investor Servicer Assessment Results 13 14-20 APPENDIX: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Compliance Criteria Tested Terms and Methodologies End Notes HAMP Activity by State HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State HAMP Performance Data by Vintage HAMP Activity by MSA Note: For more information and quarterly updates about HHF, please visit the program website or the TARP Monthly Report to Congress. For information and quarterly updates about efforts taken by the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) beyond their participation in MHA which is not reflected in this report please visit the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report. For information on efforts undertaken by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) please visit its website. A-1 A-2 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7 A-8 3 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 MHA Program Updates • In the third quarter, Treasury released an update to a 2012 white paper on the effect of Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) on modifications in HAMP. The updated analysis reaffirmed previous findings indicating that payment reduction is an important driver of HAMP modification performance, and homeowners who receive a HAMP modification with principal reduction perform better than those without principal reduction. Separately, Treasury published another analysis that suggests that the post-modification DTI ratio is not an indicator of loan performance. Click here to read both analyses. • Preliminary data indicates that homeowners who participate in financial counseling at the start of their HAMP trial modification perform better than homeowners who do not participate. • The MHA Servicer Assessment results for the third quarter of 2016 begin on page 14. Five servicers were rated as needing minor improvement and two were rated as needing moderate improvement. All servicers met Treasury’s benchmark on five of eight metrics: assignment of a single point of contact, accuracy of eligibility decisions, timely evaluation of HAMP applications, accurate data used and reported to calculate incentives, and processing of interest rate step-up changes. However, some servicers still need to improve in the areas of proper identification and reporting of disqualified modifications, issuance of interest rate step-up notices and accurate income calculation. MHA Program Activity1,2 Program-to-Date MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications Started2 Q3 2016 Q2 2016 2,081,557 44,918 45,258 HAMP Tier 1 1,450,207 8,912 9,842 HAMP Tier 2 185,994 13,364 14,031 18,121 10,310 7,811 GSE Standard Modifications (SAI) 300,282 6,948 7,844 Treasury FHA and RD HAMP 126,953 5,384 5,730 2MP Modifications Started 161,444 2,334 2,311 HAFA Transactions Completed 443,340 13,174 12,784 UP Forbearance Plans Started 46,251 125 573 2,732,592 60,551 60,926 Permanent Modifications (Thousands) Cumulative Activity Quarterly Trending of MHA Permanent Modifications Started & Estimated Number of Loans 60+ Days Delinquent 75 2.3 60 2.1 45 1.9 30 1.7 15 Delinquent Loans (Millions) Streamline HAMP 1.5 0 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 HAMP TIER 1 NON-GSE HAMP TIER 1 GSE HAMP TIER 2 GSE SAI FHA/RD-HAMP Q2 2016 Q3 2016 60+ Days DLQ * Delinquency data is an estimate derived from the Mortgage Bankers Association Quarterly National Delinquency Survey. STREAMLINE HAMP 4 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 HAMP Summary All Trials Started3 2,477,897 Tier 1 Tier 2 Trial Modifications 2,226,122 214,101 Streamline HAMP 37,674 Active Trials 38,867 109,289 Trial Modifications Cancelled Since Verified Income Requirement* 1,654,322 All Permanent Modifications Started Permanent Modifications Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)** 557,912 Active Permanent Modifications 972,021 * When Treasury launched HAMP in the spring of 2009 and 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. A total of 675,419 trials started before June 2010 have been cancelled. A cumulative 784,708 trials have been cancelled program-to-date. ** Does not include 116,558 loans paid off and 7,831 loans withdrawn. Outcome for Homeowners Who Did 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. • 23% were referred to foreclosure. Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification or Those Whose HAMP Trial Modification was Cancelled 2% 3% Action Pending 21% 2% Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process 3% 36% Borrower Current / Loan Payoff Alternative Modification / Payment Plan Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu 14% Foreclosure Starts 22% Source: Survey data from large servicers4 Foreclosure Completions 5 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Select HAMP Modification Characteristics* Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated at more than $46 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, as well as a streamlined modification process introduced in January 2016: • Under HAMP Tier 1, servicers apply the modification steps in sequence until the homeowner’s post-modification front-end debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is 31%. The impact of each modification step can vary to achieve the target of 31%. • Under 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. • Under Streamline HAMP, seriously delinquent homeowners who have not been able to complete a HAMP application may be eligible to receive mortgage assistance through a combination of modification steps similar to HAMP Tier 2. Unlike Tier 1 and Tier 2, Streamline HAMP does not require that borrowers document their income. Modification Steps for Permanent Modifications Homeowner Characteristics All permanent modifications reflect some combination of the following modification steps: Characteristic Tier 1 Tier 2 Streamline All Modification Step Tier 1 Tier 2 Streamline All $3,912 $5,000 N/A $4,007 Interest Rate Reduction 95.7% 70.1% 84.8% 92.7% Median Monthly Gross Income Term Extension 60.3% 86.8% 99.2% 63.7% Median Credit Score 566 560 566 565 Principal Forbearance 31.3% 32.0% 22.6% 31.2% Median $178,000 $155,500 $155,500 $175,000 Property Value Select Median Permanent Modification Characteristics Loan Before After Characteristic Modification Modification Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio Median Decrease Additional HAMP Tier 2 Characteristics HAMP Tier 2 provides another modification opportunity for struggling homeowners who do not qualify for a HAMP Tier 1 modification, or for those who lose good standing (by missing three payments) on their HAMP Tier 1 modification. Of the HAMP Tier 2 trial modifications started: Tier 1 43.8% 31.0% -13.4 pct pts Tier 2 28.1% 21.1% -6.6 pct pts Combined 42.8% 31.0% -12.3 pct pts • 28% were previously in a HAMP Tier 1 trial or permanent modification. • 10% were previously evaluated for HAMP Tier 1 and did not meet eligibility requirements. • 6% were non-owner-occupied properties. Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio Tier 1 67.2% 50.2% -13.7 pct pts Tier 2 44.4% 37.0% -6.7 pct pts Combined 64.6% 48.4% -12.5 pct pts Monthly Housing Payment** Tier 1 $1,380.49 $812.70 ($498.73) Tier 2 $1,028.47 $661.82 ($332.60) $899.09 $556.51 ($322.60) $1,337.41 $794.25 ($472.39) Streamline All *HAMP modification characteristics reflect data at the date of modification. **Excludes the impact of any interest rate increases and reamortization of capitalized homeowner incentives which may begin to occur after the fifth year of the HAMP Tier 1 modification. 6 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 HAMP Tier 1 Payment Adjustment Summary The HAMP Tier 1 modification was designed to reduce a homeowner’s monthly mortgage payment to an affordable level, 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. The interest rate is reduced in increments to achieve the target 31% DTI with an interest rate floor of 2%. 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 3.45% in Q3 2016), at which time the interest rate will be fixed for the remaining loan term. HAMP Tier 1 Interest Rate Increases • • • Approximately 80% of HAMP Tier 1 homeowners will experience an interest rate increase after five years. o The majority of HAMP homeowners will experience two to three interest rate increases. o The median amount of the first monthly payment increase is $93, and the median monthly payment increase after the final interest rate increase is $206. Through September 2016, more than 424,000 homeowners have experienced one interest rate step-up. Additionally, 235,000 have experienced a second rate step-up. o Based on reported data, the rate increase does not appear to have an impact on the performance of these modifications. The percentage of modifications disqualifying in the month following the reset remains consistent with the months leading up to the reset, at less than or equal to 1%. To help mitigate the impact of interest rate step-ups, servicers can offer borrowers the opportunity to recast their HAMP modifications upon reaching their sixth year anniversary. To date, approximately 27,700 loans have been recast, 88% of which experienced an interest rate step-up. Monthly payments for recast loans have been reduced by a median of $56. Number of Interest Rate Increases by Quarter* 160,000 140,000 Number of Loans 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 First Increase Second Increase Third Increase * As of September 2016. Assumes no future re-defaults of HAMP Tier 1 modifications. See Appendix 6 for additional information on HAMP Tier 1 interest rate increases by state. Q4 2021 Q3 2021 Q2 2021 Q1 2021 Q4 2020 Q3 2020 Q2 2020 Q1 2020 Q4 2019 Q3 2019 Q2 2019 Q1 2019 Q4 2018 Q3 2018 Q2 2018 Q1 2018 Q4 2017 Q3 2017 Q2 2017 Q1 2017 Q4 2016 Q3 2016 Q2 2016 Q1 2016 Q4 2015 Q3 2015 Q2 2015 Q1 2015 Q4 2014 Q3 2014 0 Fourth Increase 7 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Performance of HAMP Permanent Modifications Differences in modification characteristics contribute to differences in the performance of HAMP modifications. Those characteristics can also affect the performance of certain vintages and contribute to differences in performance between HAMP Tier 1 and Tier 2. HAMP Tier 1 # Months Post Modification 3 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 HAMP Tier 2 The tables below show the performance of HAMP permanent modifications at various seasoning points for those modifications that have aged to, or past, the number of months noted. It is important to note that far fewer loans have reached these seasoning points for HAMP Tier 2, which was introduced several years after HAMP Tier 1. # Months Post Modification 3 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 2009 2010 2011 2.1% 6.7% 16.3% 22.9% 28.8% 33.3% 37.5% 41.0% 43.5% 45.9% 47.9% 1.7% 6.7% 15.6% 22.7% 28.1% 32.6% 36.6% 39.3% 41.6% 43.6% 45.6% 1.2% 5.3% 12.7% 18.9% 23.8% 27.3% 30.1% 32.5% 34.6% 36.5% 39.1% % of Disqualified HAMP Tier 1 Modifications5 Q1 Q2 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 1.0% 0.8% 1.1% 1.3% 0.9% 1.4% 4.3% 3.8% 4.7% 5.2% 4.8% 5.3% 10.3% 9.5% 10.6% 11.6% 15.3% 14.0% 15.1% 15.7% 19.1% 17.3% 18.4% 22.1% 19.8% 20.6% 24.6% 22.1% 26.7% 24.5% 29.0% 31.9% % of Disqualified HAMP Tier 2 Modifications5 Q1 Q2 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 1.3% 1.8% 1.6% 1.7% 1.2% 1.4% 5.5% 7.7% 7.0% 7.9% 6.4% 7.3% 17.4% 17.1% 16.1% 17.6% 23.3% 24.4% 22.6% 23.7% 28.8% 28.8% 27.4% 32.2% 32.2% 31.2% 34.6% 35.0% 37.8% 39.3% N/A HAMP Tier 1 Performance by Investor 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 18 24 30 36 42 48 ALL 1.6% 7.4% 16.9% 23.4% 28.1% 31.9% 34.9% 38.9% With Prior Tier 1 Modification Private 60% 12 1.3% 5.5% 13.1% 19.2% 24.0% 28.0% 31.6% 34.7% 37.7% 40.6% 43.6% Modifications that were previously modified under HAMP Tier 1 have a higher likelihood of disqualifying from the subsequent Tier 2 modification. 54 60 90+ Day Delinquency Rate 90+ Day Delinquency Rate Portfolio Q3 2016 1.7% ALL HAMP Tier 2 Performance by Prior Modification History Modifications of private label security loans have the highest delinquency rates, followed by modifications of portfolio loans and GSE loans. GSE Q3 2016 0.9% Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification See Appendix 7 for additional information on HAMP performance by vintage. Without Prior Tier 1 Modification 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 12 18 24 30 36 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 42 8 Making Home Affordable: HAMP Program Results Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Incremental Performance of HAMP Modifications over Time 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 6 that disqualified by month 9. Conditional Re-default Rate for Tier 1 and Tier 2 Modifications by Modification Year (% of Active Loans) 3-Month Re-default Rate 6% 2009 2010 2011 5% 2012 4% 2013 2014 3% 2015 2% 1% 0% 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification Note: A modification's inclusion in the 3-month re-default rate calculation is conditional on the modification being active at the start of the 3-month period being measured. Homeowners with Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications Homeowners 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 actions. The majority of homeowners who disqualify from a HAMP permanent modification receive an alternative to foreclosure or resolve their delinquency. Homeowners can also take advantage of other MHA and/or government sponsored assistance programs. Of the homeowners who have missed three payments, and therefore disqualified from HAMP, approximately 25% have been referred to foreclosure. Status of Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications 6% 4% 20% Action Pending Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process 17% Borrower Current / Loan Payoff Alternative Modification / Payment Plan 5% Short Sale / Deed-in-Lieu Foreclosure Starts Foreclosure Completions 14% 33% Source: Survey data from large servicers4 9 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Post-Modification Counseling Since March 2014, Treasury has required certain HAMP participating servicers to offer free financial counseling to homeowners with non-GSE loans who are either entering a HAMP trial modification, or are in a permanent HAMP modification and are determined to be at risk of re-default. The counseling is designed to help homeowners stay in their modification by addressing the homeowner’s current overall financial situation and the financial hardship that caused the homeowner to default on his or her mortgage loan. Through September 2016, participating servicers have made more than 521,000 referrals to financial counseling. Of these: • 52% are permanent modifications considered by the servicers to be at risk of disqualifying from HAMP, and 48% are new trial modifications. • Nearly 38,000 referrals started financial counseling resulting in an overall take-up rate of 7.2%. Counseling Referral Activity by Servicer At-Risk New Trials 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Nationstar Ocwen Loan Select Wells Fargo Bank of CitiMortgage, JPMorgan America, N.A. Inc. Chase Bank, Mortgage LLC Servicing, LLC Portfolio Bank, N.A. N.A. Servicing, Inc. % of Referrals Who Take Up Counseling 4% 10% 16% 2% 6% 8% Other Servicers 9% 8% Performance of Borrowers Who Participated in Counseling 90+ Day Delinquency Rate Borrowers in a new HAMP trial modification who participate in financial counseling at the start of their trial modification perform better following counseling than borrowers who do not participate. For example, 12 months after counseling, fewer than 11% of borrowers who participated in counseling disqualified from their HAMP modification, compared to 14% for those who did not. Participated in Counseling 20% Did Not Participate in Counseling 15% 10% 5% 0% Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 Month 15 Month 18 Note: Data on Post-Modification Counseling is collected from sixteen servicers via survey. Servicer take-up rates will vary due to timing of referrals and individual servicer program design. Borrower performance data is limited by servicer program design. 10 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 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 PRA6 HAMP Modifications with Upfront Principal Reduction Outside of PRA Total HAMP Modifications with Principal Reduction 229,008 162,868 54,232 37,727 283,240 200,595 $64,314 $52,084 $61,340 32.1% 18.0% 30.4% $19,922,465,868 $3,488,497,642 $23,410,963,510 All Permanent Modifications Started Active Permanent Modifications Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent Modifications7 Median Principal Amount Reduced for Permanent Modifications (%)8 Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Permanent Modifications7 The Second Lien Modification Program9 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)* 161,444 Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 47,856 Active Second Lien Modifications** 80,407 Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments 10,526 * Includes 8,721 loans that have a qualifying first lien GSE Standard Modification. ** Includes 9,445 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. 11 Making Home Affordable: Other MHA Programs Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Program offers incentives and a streamlined process for homeowners looking to exit their homes or sell a rental property through a short sale or deed-in-lieu (DIL) of foreclosure. HAFA has established important homeowner protections and an industry standard for streamlined transactions. Effective November 2012, the GSEs revised their Standard HAFA program to align with Treasury’s HAFA program. In HAFA transactions, homeowners who need to relocate: • Follow a streamlined process for short sales and DIL transactions that requires no verification of income (unless required by investors) and allows for pre-approved short sale terms; • Receive a waiver of deficiency once the transaction is completed that releases the homeowner from remaining mortgage debt; and • Receive $10,000* in relocation assistance at closing. * Prior to February 1, 2015, homeowners received $3,000. HAFA Activity by Investor Type Participating servicers must consider all homeowners 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 Portfolio GSE Total 154,314 381,955 4,878 45,638 61,385 165,183 Total Transactions Completed 173,551 10,869 Deed-in-Lieu 54,090 58,968 219,189 443,340 The Home Affordable Unemployment Program The Home Affordable Unemployment Program (UP) provides assistance to homeowners who are unable to make their mortgage payments as a result of unemployment. Unemployed homeowners can receive up to 12 months of forbearance, during which mortgage payments are reduced or suspended, allowing homeowners to seek employment without fear that they will lose their homes to foreclosure. All UP Forbearance Plans Started 46,251 UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 39,393 UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 6,858 12 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Making Home Affordable Program Activity by Servicer As of September 2016, there are 136 servicers that participate in Treasury’s MHA programs, but seven servicers make up nearly 85% of non-GSE HAMP modifications. Program activity for these servicers is provided below. Servicer HAMP Tier 1 HAMP Tier 2 Permanent Permanent Modifications Modifications Streamline HAFA11 nonPRA10 GSE HAMP 2MP Permanent Permanent Modifications Transactions Modifications Completed Modifications 101,629 6,594 N/A* 5,835 38,199 49,786 32,947 3,703 0 3,238 20,071 2,443 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 164,298 5,038 1,331 25,207 44,320 38,100 Nationstar Mortgage LLC 178,877 24,049 56 10,972 9,770 10,639 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 243,689 76,748 10,027 111,354 N/A* 28,399 Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. 110,169 26,271 5,972 20,389 N/A* 21,978 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 203,656 12,071 0 31,781 24,738 43,517 Other Servicers 414,942 31,520 735 20,232 24,346 29,289 1,450,207 185,994 18,121 229,008 161,444 224,151 Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. Total *Servicer does not participate in Streamline HAMP or HAMP 2MP. HAMP Permanent Modifications by Investor All HAMP Permanent Modifications Servicer GSE Private Portfolio Total Bank of America, N.A. 39,294 50,678 18,251 108,223 CitiMortgage, Inc. 15,269 9,173 12,208 36,650 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 70,510 57,139 43,018 170,667 115,774 78,548 8,660 202,982 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 23,942 284,531 21,991 330,464 Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. 11,733 110,658 20,021 142,412 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 82,327 44,747 88,653 215,727 Other Servicers 296,400 85,695 65,102 447,197 Total 655,249 721,169 277,904 1,654,322 Nationstar Mortgage LLC 13 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Making Home Affordable Servicer Assessments Background Since the MHA Program’s inception in the spring of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage servicers. Freddie Mac, acting as Treasury’s compliance agent, has created a separate division known as Making Home Affordable–Compliance (MHA-C), which evaluates servicers’ compliance with MHA guidelines through regular compliance reviews. MHA-C examines as many as 60 compliance criteria (see Appendix 2) and tests between 500 and 600 loan files (per servicer, for the largest servicers) each quarter. Loan samples are randomly selected for testing from two sources: the MHA transactions reported by each servicer into the MHA system of record and the servicer’s records of non-performing loans. This approach provides comprehensive insight into how each servicer is implementing MHA programs. This includes, for example, whether the servicer is properly identifying, contacting and evaluating borrowers who are potentially eligible for MHA, as well as the accuracy and timeliness of the MHA data reported by the servicer. MHA-C reports the results of each compliance review to Treasury and the servicer. For identified instances of noncompliance, Treasury requires servicers to take remedial actions which include, but are not limited to: identifying and re-evaluating any affected loans, performing retroactive analysis when an issue is potentially systemic, and enhancing the effectiveness of internal controls. It is important to note that servicer participation in MHA is voluntary, based on a contract with Fannie Mae as financial agent on behalf of Treasury. Treasury does not regulate these institutions and does not have the authority to impose fines or penalties. Treasury can, pursuant to the contract, take certain remedial actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of noncompliance, as noted above. In addition, Treasury can implement financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to servicers. Such incentive payments, which are the only payments Treasury makes for the benefit of servicers under the program, include payments for permanent modifications under HAMP and completed transactions under HAFA. MHA Servicer Assessments In 2011, Treasury began publishing quarterly servicer assessments for the large servicers participating in MHA to improve transparency and drive servicers to improve their performance. The assessments highlight the results of MHA compliance reviews and rate servicers on the level of improvement needed. In addition, the assessments include program data reported by servicers into the MHA system of record. These program results are key indicators of how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible homeowners and report program data to Treasury. The assessments do not rate the servicer based on program results, but compare each servicer’s program results for a given quarter against the other large servicers participating in the program. Treasury has periodically enhanced the assessments to focus on new or emerging areas of interest, provide additional insight into the impact of servicer performance on homeowners’ experience, and foster further improvement in servicer performance. The most recent changes, effective the second quarter of 2015, included: the addition of metrics that address timely evaluation of borrowers for HAMP, accuracy of interest rate step-up changes, and timeliness and completeness of interest rate step-up notices; the consolidation of two “second look” metrics; the removal of the non-approval metric; and tightened performance benchmarks. Each quarter, Treasury reviews the compliance results and ratings, the program results, and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not limited to a servicer’s progress in remediating previously identified issues) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial, moderate or minor improvement to its overall performance under MHA. For servicers in need of substantial improvement, Treasury will, absent extenuating circumstances, withhold financial incentives owed to those servicers until they make certain identified improvements. In certain cases, particularly where there is a failure to correct identified problems within a reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently withhold the financial incentives. Servicers in need of moderate improvement may be subject to withholding in the future if they fail to make certain identified improvements. All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their participation in MHA, not incentives paid to servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors. Please refer to Appendices 1 and 2 for more information concerning the MHA Servicer Assessments. 14 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Third Quarter 2016 Servicer Assessment Summary Results Improvement Needed Servicer Name Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. Minor JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Moderate Substantial Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC None The table above summarizes the results of the MHA Servicer Assessments for the third quarter of 2016. The compliance and program results for the individual servicers can be found on the following pages. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC was found to need moderate improvement, however, compliance results approached the level required for a determination of minor improvement. 15 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 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. Please refer to Appendix 1 for more information concerning the metrics described below. Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and communicates decisions timely. Program Management and Reporting Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, submits timely and accurate program reports and information and whether the servicer accurately and timely communicates interest rate step-ups. Metric Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance Benchmark Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single Point of Contact to a homeowner in accordance with MHA guidelines 2.0% Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with or was unable to conclude on the servicer's MHA eligibility determination for applicable programs 2.0% Second Look % Noncompliance Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% for applicable programs 2.0% Timely HAMP Evaluation % Noncompliance Percentage of loans reviewed for which MHA-C determined the servicer did not complete the evaluation within the prescribed time frame for reasons within the servicer’s control 2.0% Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs 2.0% Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines 2.0% Interest Rate Step-Up Changes Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C noted discrepancies between the terms of the interest rate stepup in the official modification agreement and payment application in the loan payment history 5.0% Interest Rate Step-Up Notices Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C noted that the interest rate step-up notices sent by the servicer were not in accordance with MHA guidelines 5.0% 16 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Third Quarter 2016 Compliance Results Single Point of Second Contact Look % Assignment % NonNoncompliance compliance Servicer BENCHMARK Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 5.0% 5.0% Servicer Results 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.1% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Results 1.8% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Results 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Results 0.0% 1.2% 3.0% 0.6% 0.5% 12.8% 0.0% 5.1% Rating *** *** ** *** *** * *** ** Servicer Results 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.8% 2.5% 0.0% 0.2% Rating *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Results 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.6% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Rating *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Servicer Select Portfolio Results Servicing, Inc. Rating Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Interest Rate Interest Rate Disqualified Timely HAMP Incentive Step-Up Step-Up Income Modification Evaluation % Payment Changes % Notices % Calculation % NonNonData Errors NonNonError % compliance compliance compliance compliance¤ Note: Beginning in Q2 2016, the Interest Rate Step-Up Notice Non-compliance assessment weightings were updated. The results of this metric may not be comparable to previous quarters. 17 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Compliance Results Trending The trending table was expanded in the second quarter of 2015 to reflect the results across five assessment metrics. 2015 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 Ba nk of Ameri ca , N.A. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Ci ti Mortga ge, Inc. 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% JPMorga n Cha s e Ba nk, N.A. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% Na ti ons ta r Mortga ge LLC 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Ocwen Loa n Servi ci ng, LLC 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Sel ect Portfol i o Servi ci ng, Inc. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Wel l s Fa rgo Ba nk, N.A. 4.2% 6.7% 0.0% 3.0% Servicer 2016 Q1 Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance Second Look % Noncompliance (Combined)* Ba nk of Ameri ca , N.A. 0.0% 1.4% 1.4% 0.5% 2.3% 0.5% 0.4% 1.7% 0.0% Ci ti Mortga ge, Inc. 4.2% 3.7% 4.9% 2.5% 0.5% 1.8% 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% JPMorga n Cha s e Ba nk, N.A. 0.9% 1.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.0% 0.9% 1.7% 0.9% 0.4% Na ti ons ta r Mortga ge LLC 0.0% 1.5% 6.9% 9.5% 6.4% 4.7% 0.4% 1.6% 1.2% Ocwen Loa n Servi ci ng, LLC 3.1% 1.0% 1.9% 2.0% 2.4% 3.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Sel ect Portfol i o Servi ci ng, Inc. 2.3% 2.2% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Wel l s Fa rgo Ba nk, N.A. 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 3.4% 2.3% 1.8% 1.3% 0.8% 0.4% Income Calculation Error % Ba nk of Ameri ca , N.A. 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 6.0% 16.0% 11.0% 13.0% 9.0% 0.0% Ci ti Mortga ge, Inc. 1.0% 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.0% JPMorga n Cha s e Ba nk, N.A. 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Na ti ons ta r Mortga ge LLC 4.0% 3.0% 5.0% 1.0% 0.0% 3.0% 3.0% 1.0% 3.0% Ocwen Loa n Servi ci ng, LLC 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.0% Sel ect Portfol i o Servi ci ng, Inc. 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% Wel l s Fa rgo Ba nk, N.A. 0.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Incentive Payment Data Errors ** Ba nk of Ameri ca , N.A. 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% 2.5% 2.6% 1.1% 2.6% 4.2% 0.0% Ci ti Mortga ge, Inc. 0.1% 0.6% 0.5% 1.0% 1.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4% JPMorga n Cha s e Ba nk, N.A. 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.8% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% Na ti ons ta r Mortga ge LLC 2.0% 0.2% 1.0% 1.5% 0.7% 3.3% 3.0% 1.3% 0.5% Ocwen Loa n Servi ci ng, LLC 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% 0.8% Sel ect Portfol i o Servi ci ng, Inc. 0.6% 2.2% 1.2% 1.6% 0.8% 0.7% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% Wel l s Fa rgo Ba nk, N.A. 0.4% 0.8% 0.3% 0.9% 0.3% 0.4% 0.7% 0.7% 0.1% Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance Ba nk of Ameri ca , N.A. 0.8% 2.3% 5.0% 2.0% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 8.8% 2.3% 3.8% 6.0% 4.0% 1.5% 14.5% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Na ti ons ta r Mortga ge LLC 13.0% 6.8% 2.0% 0.8% 3.0% 0.0% 13.0% 5.3% 12.8% Ocwen Loa n Servi ci ng, LLC 1.0% 3.8% 1.8% 7.3% 3.8% 3.8% 2.3% 2.0% 2.5% Sel ect Portfol i o Servi ci ng, Inc. 1.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.5% Wel l s Fa rgo Ba nk, N.A. ** Note: 0.8% 12.0% JPMorga n Cha s e Ba nk, N.A. * 3.0% Ci ti Mortga ge, Inc. 8.0% 6.8% 9.3% 2.8% 1.8% 0.8% 1.0% 0.8% 0.0% Prior to Q2 2015, this metric was previously two separate metrics, "Second Look % Disagree" and "Second Look % Unable to Determine”. For comparative purposes, we have combined the historical results of these two metrics into one percentage. Beginning with the Q2 2015 Assessment, the Incentive Payment Data Errors metric includes PRA testing. Calculating error percentages from prior quarterly published figures may result in a slightly different percentage due to rounding. 18 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 HAMP Program Results HAMP Tier 1 and Tier 2 Trials Aged 6+ Months (% of Active Trials)12 40% Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 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, JPMorgan Chase Nationstar N.A. Inc. Bank, N.A. Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Q4’15 205 276 216 637 194 183 388 Q1’16 187 187 172 730 162 139 437 Q2’16 203 110 228 606 152 121 405 Q3’16 158 74 252 402 143 97 387 Average Calendar Days to Resolve All 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. As the MHA program approaches its end date, the average calendar days required to resolve escalations may rise due to fewer incoming cases and the difficulty of resolving the more complex, longstanding cases. 40 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 35 # Days 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, JPMorgan Chase Nationstar Inc. Bank, N.A. Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Select Portfolio Servicing, LLC Servicing, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 19 Making Home Affordable: Results by Servicer Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 HAMP Program Results* Timely Reporting of All 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% Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Bank of America, CitiMortgage, JPMorgan Chase Nationstar N.A. Inc. Bank, N.A. Mortgage LLC Q3 2016 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. 5.0% Q4 2015 4.5% 4.0% Q1 2016 % Missing 3.5% Q2 2016 3.0% 2.5% Q3 2016 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Bank of America, CitiMortgage, N.A. Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. *Q2 2016 data has been updated to reflect the impact of Streamline HAMP. There was minimal change in the number of missing reports, but some servicers saw reduced timeliness in reporting. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 20 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 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 Tier 1, which offers modifications for Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE) and non-GSE homeowners; HAMP Tier 2, which offers modifications for non-GSE homeowners; and Streamline HAMP, which offers modifications for non-GSE homeowners. HAMP Tier 2 is modeled after the GSE Standard Modification, which was created in October 2011 when the GSEs launched the Servicer Alignment Initiative (SAI). HAMP Tier 2 expands eligibility to include homeowners with properties currently occupied by a tenant as well as vacant properties the homeowner intends to rent. Streamline HAMP is modeled after the GSE Streamlined Modification, which was launched in July 2013. Streamline HAMP provides seriously delinquent homeowners the opportunity to receive a modification with no income documentation and reduced hardship documentation. Treasury FHA-HAMP provides first lien modifications for distressed homeowners in loans insured or guaranteed through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). 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 HAMP Tier 1, Tier 2, or GSE Standard Modification 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, Streamline HAMP, GSE Standard Modifications and both Treasury FHA- and RD-HAMP. HAMP Tier 1 includes both GSE and non-GSE modifications. Treasury's FHA-HAMP and RDHAMP are similar to HAMP Tier 1. The GSEs do not participate in HAMP Tier 2; however, the GSE Standard Modification is similar to HAMP Tier 2. The GSEs do not participate in Streamline HAMP; however, the GSE Streamlined Modification is similar to Streamline HAMP. While Streamline HAMP is modeled after GSE Streamlined Modification, GSE Streamlined Modification data is not included in this report. GSE Standard Modification data is provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of June 2016. The GSEs undertake other foreclosure prevention activities beyond their participation in MHA, including the GSE Streamlined Modification, that are not reflected in this report. The latest Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report can be found at: www.FHFA.gov. Treasury FHA-HAMP Program Notes: The FHA undertakes foreclosure prevention activities beyond their participation in MHA that are not reflected in this report. Please refer to the latest edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing Scorecard for the total number of loss mitigation and early delinquency interventions FHA has offered since April 1, 2009. Please visit www.hud.gov to view the latest Housing Scorecard. 21 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes 2MP Program Notes: Number of modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections. 2MP loans previously reported under top servicers that were transferred to or acquired by non-participating 2MP servicers are reflected in “Other Servicers.” Homeowners with an active first lien permanent modification and a second lien (2MP) modification realize a higher monthly payment reduction on their first lien compared to the overall population of first lien homeowners because of the higher median first lien unpaid principal balance. HAFA Program Notes: Unless otherwise noted, HAFA Transactions Completed includes GSE activity under the MHA program in addition to the GSE Standard HAFA program implemented in November 2012. GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of June 2016. It does not include other GSE short sale and DIL activity outside the HAFA program. Please refer to the latest Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the total number of short sales and DIL of foreclosure actions the GSEs have completed since 4Q 2008. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. A short sale requires a third-party purchaser and cooperation of junior lien holders and mortgage insurers to complete the transaction. The debt relief represents the obligation relieved by the short sale or deed-in-lieu transaction and is calculated as the unpaid principal balance and allowable transactions costs less the property sales price. The allowable transaction costs may include release of any subordinate lien, homeowner relocation assistance, sales commission, and closing costs for taxes, title, and attorney fees. PRA Program Notes: Eligible loans include those receiving evaluation under HAMP PRA guidelines plus loans that did not require an evaluation but received principal reduction on their modification. Servicer Assessment Notes: Treasury’s foremost goal is to assist struggling homeowners who may be eligible for MHA. This population represents only a portion of each servicer’s overall mortgage servicing operation. Treasury’s compliance reviews solely assess compliance with MHA requirements established by Treasury under contracts with participating servicers. Treasury does not assess servicers’ compliance with rules or requirements established by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (the GSEs) or the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), among others. Moreover, Treasury cannot and does not assess compliance of servicing activities outside of MHA. Servicers’ compliance with laws or regulations relating to mortgage servicing are enforced by other Federal agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), or by state authorities. The servicer assessments have set a benchmark for providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing against specific metrics. Although the compliance reviews that form the basis for the servicer assessments emphasize objective measurements and observed facts, compliance reviews still involve a certain level of judgment. Compliance reviews are also retrospective in nature – looking backward, not forward, which means that activities identified as needing improvement in a given quarter may already be under remediation by the servicer. In addition, the compliance reviews use “sampling” as a testing methodology. Sampling, an industry-accepted auditing technique, looks at a subset of a particular population of transactions, rather than the entirety of the population of transactions, to assess a servicer’s overall performance in that particular activity. 22 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Compliance Metrics Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance: Servicers are required to assign certain delinquent homeowners to a Single Point of Contact (SPOC). This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a SPOC to a homeowner in a timely fashion and otherwise in accordance with MHA guidelines. For SPOC Assignment Noncompliance results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: assigning a SPOC to the homeowner, and correcting system and operational processes such that SPOCs are properly assigned to homeowners in a timely fashion. Second Look % Noncompliance: Second Look is a process in which MHA-C reviews potentially eligible loans not in a permanent modification, to assess the timeliness and accuracy of the servicer’s homeowner outreach and eligibility review in order to verify that the homeowner was properly considered, denied or deemed ineligible for receiving a permanent modification. This metric measures the combined percentage of loans reviewed in Second Look where MHA-C disagreed with a servicer’s solicitation efforts and/or eligibility review and for which MHA-C is not able to determine, based on the documentation provided, whether the homeowner was properly considered, denied or deemed ineligible for receiving a permanent modification. For Second Look Noncompliance results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: reconsidering homeowners for a modification if they were not properly solicited or incorrectly evaluated, retaining documentation to support solicitation efforts and eligibility determination, and, if applicable, engaging in systemic process remediation. All loans categorized as noncompliant remain on foreclosure hold until the servicer completes the appropriate corrective actions. Income Calculation Error %: Correctly calculating homeowners’ monthly income is a critical component of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an accurate modification payment. This metric measures how often MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s calculation of a homeowner’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up to a 2% differential from MHA-C’s calculations. For Income Calculation Errors, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting income errors, requiring the servicer to review their own income calculation accuracy, enhancing policies and procedures, and conducting staff training on income calculation. Timely HAMP Evaluation % Noncompliance: Servicers are required to evaluate borrowers for HAMP within 30 calendar days from the date a complete loss mitigation application is received. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed for which MHA-C determined the servicer did not complete the evaluation within the prescribed time frame for reasons within the servicer’s control. For Timely HAMP Evaluation Noncompliance, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting operational issues such that borrowers are evaluated in a timely manner, and implementing controls that allow servicer management to identify and prioritize HAMP eligibility determinations are at risk of being delayed. 23 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 1: Program and Servicer Assessment Notes Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury provides incentives for servicers, investors, and homeowners for permanent modifications completed under MHA. Although intended for different recipients, all incentives are initially paid to servicers to distribute to the appropriate parties. Data that servicers report to the program system of record is used to calculate the incentives due to servicers, investors, and homeowners. This metric measures how data anomalies between servicer loan files and the reported information affect incentive payments. For Incentive Payment Data Error results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting the identified errors and correcting system and operational processes such that accurate data is mapped to its appropriate places in the program system of record. Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance: Permanent modifications on which homeowners lose good standing are subsequently disqualified from the program. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with a servicer’s processing of defaulted HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines. For Disqualified Modification results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting the status of improperly disqualified modifications and reporting the corrected data to the program system of record. Interest Rate Step-up Changes: In year five of a borrower’s modification, the interest rate on their modification may increase. This metric measures whether the step payment interest rate and principal and interest payment were applied in accordance with the terms of the Modification Agreement. For Interest Rate Step-Up Change results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: reversing incorrect payment applications within the servicer’s system and re-applying payments according to the terms of the Interest Rate Step-Up and correcting system and operational processes such that borrower payments are accurately applied according to the terms of the Interest Rate Step-Ups in the Modification Agreement. Interest Rate Step-up Notices: Servicers are required to send two notices of an Interest Rate Step-Up to the borrower prior to the first Step Payment Effective Date. The first notice must be sent at least 120 calendar days, but no more than 240 calendar days, before the initial payment is due at the adjusted level. An additional notice must be sent 60-75 days before the initial payment is due at the adjusted level. For subsequent adjustments, notice must be sent at least 60 calendar days, but not more than 120 calendar days, before the first payment is due at each adjusted level. This metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed where the notices were not sent within the required timeframes and/or did not include the required elements. For Interest Rate Step-Up Notice results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to, correcting system and operational processes such that Interest Rate Step-Up Notices are sent within the required timeframes and updating notice templates to ensure that all required information is included in the Interest Rate Step-Up Notices sent to the borrower. Permanent modifications on which homeowners lose good standing are subsequently disqualified from the program. This metric 24 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 2: Compliance Criteria Tested This metric Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Criteria Tested HAMP Solicitation Second Lien Solicitation Review Type Second Look Directed Actions Second Look Initial Packages sent after Right Second Look Party Contact (RPC) Objective Servicer appropriately solicited borrowers for HAMP and that the servicer met the reasonable efforts requirements Servicer has solicited borrowers with second liens for which a HAMP modification exists on the first lien Servicer sent potentially eligible borrowers HAMP packages following RPC Timely SPOC Assignment Second Look Servicer assigned a Single Point of Contact and sent a SPOC assignment letter to potentially eligible borrowers following RPC Content of Borrower Notices Second Look Borrower Notices contained required information Timely Acknowledgement Letter sent Second Look Upon receiving any part of a HAMP package, servicer sent an Acknowledgement Letter to the borrower within the required time frame Accuracy of Incomplete Information Notice (IIN) sent, where applicable Second Look Upon receiving part of a HAMP Package but not all required information, servicer sent an Incomplete Information Notice to the borrower listing documentation still needed Timely mailing of IIN, where applicable Second Look Servicer sent Incomplete Information Notices within required time frame Validation of Tier 1 Denials Second Look Denials of Tier 1 HAMP modifications are valid Validation of Tier 2 Denials Second Look Denials of Tier 2 HAMP modifications are valid Second Lien Denials Second Look Denials of second lien modifications are valid Non-Approval Notice Second Look Servicer included correct denial reason in Non-Approval Notice and sent within 10 days of decision Denial Reporting Second Look Servicer reported correct denial reason to the HAMP Program Administrator Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Criteria Tested Review Type Objective Dodd Frank Certification Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer Obtained a signed Dodd-Frank Certification from borrowers receiving a HAMP modification Accurate occupancy status Core Eligibility/Incentive Borrower occupancy status in the HAMP system of record is accurate Origination date Core Eligibility/Incentive Origination date of the mortgage is prior to January 1, 2009 Unpaid Principal Balance Core Eligibility/Incentive Pre-modification unpaid principal balance does not exceed program limits Completed Request for Mortgage Assistance or Hardship Affidavit Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer obtained a signed Request for Mortgage Assistance or Hardship Affidavit Approval Decision Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer made correct decision to approve the modification 25 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 2: Compliance Criteria Tested This metric Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Criteria Tested Completeness of full underwriting package Review Type Second Look, Core Eligibility/Incentive Objective 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 Accurate Escrow Analysis Core Eligibility/Incentive Property Valuation (AVM, BPO) Core Eligibility/Incentive obtained Accuracy of Trial Period Plan Core Eligibility/Incentive (TPP) Notice Servicer correctly underwrote the modification to ensure correct payment terms Servicer performed accurate analysis of borrower escrow to use in modification Servicer obtained appraisal or broker price opinion for the property Servicer sent accurate TPP Notices to borrowers entering a Trial modification Application of TPP payments Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately applied borrower TPP payments Recast Notices Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer sent the Recast Notice to the borrower within the required timeframe Accepted Recast Offer Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately processed the Accepted Recast Offer NPV model use/re-coding compliance Net Present Value Servicer NPV models provide accurate results consistent with the Treasury NPV model Accuracy of NPV inputs Net Present Value Servicer input accurate data into the NPV model Accuracy of Permanent Modification Agreement Core Eligibility/Incentive Permanent Modification Agreement includes correct terms including payment amount, interest rate, unpaid principal balance, and forbearance amount Core Eligibility/Incentive At time of conversion to permanent modification, servicer waived all late charges and other fees related to the delinquency of the original loan Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately applied payment amounts held in suspense at end of Trial Plan Second Look, Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately evaluated borrower for second lien modification Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately calculates second lien modification terms Second Look Servicer sent accurate Non-Approval Notices for denied second lien modifications within specified time frame Waiver of Late Charges & other Fees at conversion from TPP to Perm. Mod. Application of Unapplied Funds at end of TPP Accurate 2MP Eligibility Assessment Accurate calculation of 2MP TPP/Modification Terms Timely mailing and accuracy of 2MP Non-Approval Notice, where applicable Accurate HAFA Eligibility Assessment Second Look, Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer reviewed HAFA applications and makes appropriate eligibility decision Servicer obtained release of all liens on properties completing a HAFA short sale or deed-in-lieu HAFA - Release of Liens Core Eligibility/Incentive Escalated Cases Directed Actions Servicer timely and accurately resolved escalated case complaints Solicitation of Financial counseling notices Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer considered borrower for financial counseling by sending a notification with the TPP Timely mailing of 2MP TPPs Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer sent 2MP TPP’s within the required timeframe Timely mailing of HAFA Short Sale notices Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer sent HAFA Short Sale Notices within the required timeframe 26 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 2: Compliance Criteria Tested This metric Program Management and Reporting Criteria Tested HAMP Incentive Compensation Servicer, Borrower & Investor Review Type Core Eligibility/Incentive Application of Borrower Incentives Core Eligibility/Incentive Timely and accurate 120-Day Core Eligibility/Incentive Notice of Interest Rate Increase Timely and accurate 60-Day Notice Core Eligibility/Incentive of Interest Rate Increase Timely and accurate subsequent Core Eligibility/Incentive 60-Day Notice of Interest Rate Increase Accuracy of step rate increases Appropriate timing on reporting of denial to IR2 (i.e. at least 30 days after letter sent) Accurate reporting of HAMP Trials/Perm Mods to IR2 Appropriate notification to borrowers of Post-Modification Counseling 2MP Incentive Compensation Servicer, Borrower & Investor Accurate reporting of 2MP Trials/Perm Mods to IR2 HAFA Incentive Compensation Servicer, Borrower & Investor Accuracy of reporting of HAFA activity to IR2 Re-default and Loss of Good Standing Incentive compensation is accurate based on loan file documentation Servicer accurately applied borrower incentives to unpaid principal balance within 30 days of receipt Servicer sent accurate first notice of Interest Rate Increase between 120 and 240 days prior to first rate increase Servicer sent accurate second notice of Interest Rate Increase between 60 and 75 days prior to first rate increase Servicer sent accurate subsequent notice of Interest Rate Increase between 60 and 120 days prior to subsequent rate increase Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately calculated and implemented HAMP rate increases Second Look Servicer reported HAMP denials to the Program Administrator in accordance with program guidelines Core Eligibility/Incentive Servicer accurately reported modification information to the Program Administrator including all data used in calculating incentives Core Eligibility/Incentive Borrowers entering Trial Period Plans are notified of the availability of financial counseling Core Eligibility/Incentive Incentive compensation for second lien modifications is accurate Core Eligibility/Incentive Core Eligibility/Incentive Core Eligibility/Incentive Directed Actions, Core Eligibility/Incentive Pre-Foreclosure affirmation provided by Relationship Manager Directed Actions (SPOC) Accuracy of Foreclosure Referrals Directed Actions Certification provided to Foreclosure attorney Proper resolution of Escalated Cases Timely processing of escalated cases Validation of receipt and completeness of MHA Data for transferred loans by transferee servicer Timely processing of transferred Trial Period Plans Application of incentives for transferred modifications Objective Servicer reported accurate modification data to Program Administrator with respect to second lien modifications Incentive compensation for HAFA transactions is accurate based on loan file documentation Servicer reported accurate modification data to Program Administrator with respect to HAFA short sale and deed-in-lieu transactions 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 SPOC provided affirmation that all available loss mitigation options had been exhausted Foreclosure referrals meet the requirements of the MHA Handbook Directed Actions Servicer provided certification that HAMP modification had been explored and all other loss mitigation options had been exhausted Directed Actions Borrower complaints are resolved accurately Directed Actions Borrower complaints are resolved within prescribed time period or the borrower is notified appropriately of delays Transfer Testing Within 60 days of transfer, the transferee servicer validated the acquired loans contained all required MHA data Transfer Testing Transfer Testing Borrowers in Trial Period Plans as of the date of transfer were appropriately placed into Official Modifications Borrower incentives were applied correctly to unpaid principal balance of transferred loans where appropriate 27 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 3: 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 misses 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. Monthly Housing Payment: Principal and interest payment. 28 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 4: End Notes Note # Section End Notes 1 MHA Program Updates (page 4) MHA Program Activity includes HAMP Tier 1, HAMP Tier 2, and Streamline HAMP, except where specified. 2 MHA Program Updates (page 4) MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications Started includes GSE Standard Modifications (GSE SAI) but not GSE Streamlined Modifications. For details on all GSE programs, visit http://www.FHFA.gov/. 3 HAMP Program Results (page 5) 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 Program Results (page 5 and page 9) Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through the end of the quarter 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. HAMP Program Results (page 8) Servicers did not submit 1.5% of the total required OMRs for loans aged up to 60 months in the current reporting period. In addition, reported loan counts may shift from prior reports due to servicer data corrections. For example, if it was assumed that all unreported OMRs reflect either a current payment status or the maximum number of missed payments based on the most recently submitted OMR, the re-default rate for Tier 1 permanent modifications that have aged 60 months may range between 43.2% and 43.3%. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Other MHA Programs (page 11) Other MHA Programs (page 11) Other MHA Programs (page 11) Other MHA Programs (page 11) Results by Servicer (page 13) 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. Survey data indicates that program to date, 405,808 qualifying first lien modifications have been matched with a second lien. Of these matched second liens, approximately 57% 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. 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. Results by Servicer (page 13) Includes non-GSE activity under the MHA program only. Servicer GSE program data not available. Results by Servicer (page 19) 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 Aged Trials. As a result, fluctuations are expected in this population. 29 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 5: All HAMP Activity by State State 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 Trial Modifications Started 1,350 18,157 7,137 93,302 514,653 32,671 35,097 4,531 8,473 302,929 94,275 9,183 7,688 9,102 128,210 28,267 7,408 11,756 18,229 57,086 81,957 7,387 72,902 37,922 29,365 11,311 2,950 52,341 518 4,139 10,855 90,266 9,083 55,028 129,958 63,293 8,338 27,127 65,026 11,940 27,562 1,086 31,510 87,989 19,652 59,009 2,233 50,356 25,491 3,911 1,289 6,545 2,477,897 Permanent Modifications Started 790 11,294 4,338 56,759 364,186 21,381 24,544 2,988 5,753 201,667 60,233 6,256 4,614 5,770 87,146 18,155 4,496 7,476 11,807 39,828 56,137 5,153 46,115 24,121 18,208 7,307 1,775 33,458 279 2,629 7,460 62,287 5,856 34,586 90,944 38,947 4,983 17,816 43,442 8,464 17,409 609 20,413 53,356 12,903 38,821 1,614 34,382 16,913 2,391 807 5,218 1,654,322 Median Monthly Payment Reduction $475.06 $263.19 $246.18 $436.33 $702.04 $404.09 $514.65 $533.28 $399.43 $459.51 $353.58 $773.91 $249.13 $365.91 $491.50 $261.01 $283.63 $263.20 $279.77 $566.83 $554.29 $378.50 $340.58 $416.30 $290.88 $248.19 $387.00 $298.92 $275.83 $261.28 $461.77 $613.37 $341.97 $520.27 $753.48 $290.39 $244.23 $446.14 $334.50 $525.85 $290.94 $259.26 $283.35 $278.68 $423.05 $475.24 $363.40 $495.16 $341.20 $299.14 $357.56 $281.68 $472.39 Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment 32% 33% 33% 37% 36% 33% 37% 32% 32% 39% 36% 33% 33% 33% 40% 34% 33% 34% 33% 35% 34% 35% 38% 35% 35% 34% 32% 34% 31% 34% 34% 37% 33% 38% 38% 37% 33% 34% 34% 39% 33% 29% 35% 33% 32% 32% 34% 33% 36% 30% 30% 37% 35% 30 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 6: HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State Median Values State Monthly P&I Total Monthly Pre-Mod Monthly After Mod Payment Before Mod Pre-Mod P&I Payment Interest Income at After Mod UPB Monthly Increase at DTI Monthly P&I Increase after Rate Time of Mod P&I First Interest All Increases Rate Increase Final Monthly P&I Payment Reduction from Pre-Mod P&I AK 44.89% 6.8% $1,463.03 $4,180.63 $215,563.45 $854.09 $93.09 $176.83 -$421.77 AL 46.65% 6.8% $866.25 $2,261.26 $118,693.66 $493.50 $47.60 $96.87 -$240.43 AR 45.67% 6.5% $802.50 $2,133.03 $114,910.59 $458.73 $48.66 $100.19 -$211.11 AZ 49.52% 6.4% $1,191.27 $2,801.00 $178,109.54 $653.14 $77.98 $188.54 -$310.40 CA 48.77% 6.1% $1,940.63 $4,671.39 $306,787.45 $1,059.98 $134.85 $308.43 -$480.15 CO 46.52% 6.4% $1,234.34 $3,178.00 $188,873.08 $731.44 $80.29 $178.87 -$300.02 CT 45.52% 6.5% $1,455.05 $4,333.33 $210,205.62 $777.38 $90.66 $197.00 -$411.33 DC 47.85% 6.4% $1,703.00 $4,102.00 $273,480.49 $961.09 $119.86 $264.52 -$388.71 DE 47.13% 6.5% $1,280.07 $3,120.00 $196,111.44 $750.60 $83.56 $173.39 -$311.11 FL 47.55% 6.5% $1,191.67 $3,276.62 $170,996.09 $614.88 $74.92 $167.83 -$350.19 GA 47.48% 6.5% $1,004.44 $2,636.57 $143,288.39 $554.60 $61.52 $137.05 -$281.96 HI 48.96% 6.3% $2,427.75 $5,387.00 $395,133.51 $1,368.90 $175.34 $375.51 -$522.91 IA 44.50% 6.6% $773.71 $2,284.24 $107,451.72 $429.72 $44.55 $93.06 -$207.94 ID 48.58% 6.5% $1,147.55 $2,726.36 $170,438.21 $654.28 $73.65 $163.89 -$288.20 IL 47.06% 6.5% $1,277.72 $3,701.59 $178,506.04 $641.78 $78.07 $176.57 -$393.74 IN 46.11% 6.8% $811.81 $2,150.57 $109,446.49 $451.36 $44.51 $93.39 -$224.83 KS 44.50% 6.6% $896.56 $2,712.31 $125,808.79 $499.42 $51.29 $110.25 -$243.66 KY 45.78% 6.8% $811.79 $2,200.51 $112,000.00 $457.90 $45.89 $95.51 -$222.44 LA 45.53% 6.9% $891.42 $2,550.55 $123,109.64 $492.78 $51.05 $99.87 -$254.75 MA 47.02% 6.4% $1,656.31 $4,336.89 $249,923.35 $911.40 $107.76 $237.55 -$426.99 MD 46.86% 6.4% $1,671.31 $4,332.06 $259,529.16 $936.67 $113.41 $250.19 -$412.95 ME 46.60% 6.6% $1,135.90 $3,003.78 $163,230.39 $614.20 $70.05 $142.87 -$302.49 MI 46.90% 6.5% $955.25 $2,668.29 $129,774.65 $504.83 $54.18 $123.32 -$277.72 MN 46.13% 6.3% $1,202.01 $3,295.39 $178,267.43 $675.64 $76.38 $174.74 -$309.45 MO 46.06% 6.6% $879.26 $2,476.09 $122,897.27 $481.98 $50.88 $108.42 -$250.09 MS 46.59% 6.9% $810.63 $2,223.25 $110,659.79 $446.76 $44.92 $88.44 -$238.38 MT 46.95% 6.4% $1,268.22 $3,249.00 $193,934.45 $730.05 $81.17 $168.73 -$311.98 NC 46.46% 6.6% $944.77 $2,492.91 $133,399.55 $537.30 $55.87 $115.93 -$252.36 ND 42.23% 6.5% $883.85 $2,778.26 $135,117.50 $524.81 $55.87 $111.07 -$204.43 NE 43.79% 6.7% $772.46 $2,457.87 $108,107.90 $441.55 $44.63 $90.39 -$214.90 NH 43.97% 6.4% $1,342.22 $4,160.00 $197,834.07 $762.60 $84.36 $180.09 -$346.65 31 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 6: HAMP Tier 1 Scheduled Interest Rate Increases by State Median Values State Monthly P&I Total Monthly Pre-Mod Monthly After Mod Payment Before Mod Pre-Mod P&I Payment Interest Income at After Mod UPB Monthly Increase at DTI Monthly P&I Increase after Rate Time of Mod P&I First Interest All Increases Rate Increase Final Monthly P&I Payment Reduction from Pre-Mod P&I NJ 45.20% 6.4% $1,701.31 $5,240.88 $249,619.63 $885.29 $109.82 $235.38 -$471.71 NM 47.27% 6.5% $1,060.58 $2,748.63 $156,076.77 $613.83 $67.36 $142.98 -$285.97 NV 50.14% 6.3% $1,368.53 $3,126.07 $207,818.57 $738.34 $91.34 $215.93 -$364.09 NY 47.06% 6.4% $2,082.24 $5,709.06 $312,573.16 $1,084.98 $137.41 $294.90 -$581.34 OH 45.44% 6.6% $818.74 $2,385.96 $110,232.52 $444.38 $45.38 $98.56 -$234.97 OK 44.73% 6.9% $773.49 $2,347.50 $105,791.65 $436.56 $42.83 $86.16 -$224.80 OR 46.66% 6.4% $1,321.03 $3,447.38 $206,426.79 $768.62 $90.83 $197.64 -$322.44 PA 45.20% 6.6% $1,078.30 $3,175.92 $151,037.24 $583.91 $63.26 $128.63 -$295.88 RI 47.39% 6.4% $1,358.95 $3,646.50 $196,350.00 $705.66 $84.92 $190.19 -$399.31 SC 46.74% 6.6% $957.70 $2,483.15 $136,794.91 $545.00 $57.55 $120.17 -$252.26 SD 44.03% 6.4% $929.37 $2,720.92 $136,055.05 $527.54 $55.95 $124.66 -$214.85 TN 47.02% 6.9% $870.63 $2,295.68 $117,934.32 $481.02 $47.82 $98.86 -$258.73 TX 43.17% 7.0% $853.30 $2,936.92 $117,754.23 $482.81 $48.16 $98.32 -$248.35 UT 47.63% 6.5% $1,365.90 $3,269.51 $210,886.96 $801.81 $92.41 $208.90 -$321.05 VA 46.68% 6.4% $1,591.08 $4,045.00 $248,250.38 $903.34 $107.27 $237.07 -$359.10 VT 45.93% 6.8% $1,139.07 $3,118.93 $168,422.73 $628.54 $71.61 $153.32 -$305.17 WA 46.43% 6.4% $1,510.24 $3,968.71 $240,819.10 $872.60 $106.24 $229.19 -$351.56 WI 45.12% 6.5% $984.65 $2,980.64 $137,670.92 $530.59 $58.58 $125.15 -$276.17 WV 46.64% 6.6% $1,064.59 $2,658.27 $154,989.02 $627.19 $63.78 $127.56 -$263.06 WY 46.20% 6.5% $1,304.38 $3,228.23 $190,755.07 $800.37 $80.57 $165.15 -$306.39 PR 51.16% 6.3% $758.56 $1,616.14 $102,577.46 $434.32 $43.81 $92.28 -$215.53 Nationwide* 47.32% 6.4% $1,442.34 $3,795.23 $214,167.19 $778.76 $92.66 $205.97 -$370.83 * Includes U.S. Territories 32 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 7: Performance of HAMP Modifications by Vintage HAMP Tier 1 Mod. Effective in: # 2009Q3 2009Q4 2010Q1 2010Q2 2010Q3 2010Q4 2011Q1 2011Q2 2011Q3 2011Q4 2012Q1 2012Q2 2012Q3 2012Q4 2013Q1 2013Q2 2013Q3 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 All 3,566 43,360 123,529 147,072 85,932 57,838 70,601 79,610 80,645 64,738 49,180 43,829 47,147 39,183 39,150 31,453 31,831 27,229 23,615 18,980 16,951 15,097 14,790 14,240 12,619 10,462 9,623 8,738 2,782 1,213,790 3 Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 6 12 60+ Days 90+ Days 10.7% 5.7% 4.3% 5.3% 5.1% 4.6% 2.8% 3.7% 3.7% 3.4% 2.5% 3.0% 3.1% 3.2% 2.2% 2.6% 2.9% 2.9% 2.5% 3.7% 3.5% 3.8% 2.9% 3.9% 3.9% 4.2% 3.2% 4.0% 4.2% 3.9% 4.5% 1.9% 1.5% 1.8% 1.9% 1.8% 1.0% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.7% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 0.9% 1.1% 1.3% 1.5% 0.9% 1.4% 1.4% 1.5% 0.9% 1.4% 0.9% 1.3% # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 18 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 4,386 47,167 149,735 156,695 95,609 62,308 75,619 88,870 85,712 67,257 50,618 44,809 48,834 41,101 40,807 32,928 33,304 28,546 25,511 19,793 17,799 16,867 15,760 14,791 13,050 10,918 10,001 3,232 15.8% 10.2% 10.4% 12.3% 11.1% 8.9% 8.2% 9.3% 8.8% 6.9% 6.7% 7.7% 7.4% 6.3% 6.0% 6.5% 7.0% 6.3% 6.9% 7.8% 8.0% 7.1% 7.2% 9.0% 8.8% 8.4% 8.2% 8.9% 10.6% 6.3% 6.1% 7.5% 7.1% 5.7% 5.1% 5.8% 5.6% 4.4% 4.1% 4.6% 4.6% 3.9% 3.5% 3.9% 4.2% 3.9% 3.9% 5.1% 5.4% 4.5% 4.4% 5.5% 5.5% 5.6% 4.8% 5.3% 4,584 51,027 160,557 173,008 103,877 64,944 79,348 92,383 86,704 67,612 50,654 45,091 49,567 42,318 41,928 33,633 34,697 29,826 26,365 20,421 18,373 17,296 16,161 15,082 13,340 4,028 25.7% 20.4% 20.4% 19.6% 18.2% 18.4% 17.0% 16.2% 15.6% 14.7% 14.1% 13.6% 13.0% 12.3% 12.6% 11.8% 12.2% 12.3% 13.2% 13.1% 13.5% 14.0% 13.9% 15.0% 15.3% 15.4% 21.1% 15.8% 16.1% 16.1% 14.5% 14.5% 13.6% 13.2% 12.3% 11.4% 10.9% 10.9% 10.1% 9.4% 9.6% 9.4% 9.3% 9.5% 10.4% 10.7% 10.6% 10.7% 10.9% 12.0% 11.8% 12.0% 4,917 54,202 165,576 170,232 105,845 66,490 80,939 91,684 86,462 67,774 50,048 44,600 50,073 42,570 42,297 33,915 34,504 29,820 26,290 20,362 18,373 17,468 16,131 5,341 32.2% 25.4% 26.0% 27.8% 25.3% 23.9% 22.2% 23.2% 21.8% 19.3% 18.6% 18.9% 17.9% 16.3% 16.6% 16.5% 16.5% 16.1% 16.6% 17.8% 18.2% 17.9% 18.3% 18.6% 28.9% 22.3% 22.5% 24.1% 21.9% 21.1% 19.2% 20.1% 18.9% 16.8% 15.9% 16.1% 15.1% 14.0% 14.0% 14.1% 14.1% 13.9% 14.4% 15.1% 15.6% 15.5% 15.7% 15.6% 1,302,027 9.0% 5.5% 1,342,824 16.5% 13.1% 1,325,913 22.2% 19.2% 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. 33 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 7: Performance of HAMP Modifications by Vintage HAMP Tier 1 Mod. Effective in: 2009Q3 2009Q4 2010Q1 2010Q2 2010Q3 2010Q4 2011Q1 2011Q2 2011Q3 2011Q4 2012Q1 2012Q2 2012Q3 2012Q4 2013Q1 2013Q2 2013Q3 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 All 24 # Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 36 48 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 60 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 5,019 55,142 167,387 178,383 105,887 66,258 80,610 91,280 84,950 67,491 50,558 44,803 50,325 42,696 42,083 34,056 34,631 29,798 26,371 20,460 18,319 5,580 36.7% 31.5% 31.9% 31.1% 29.4% 29.5% 27.6% 27.3% 25.8% 23.4% 22.6% 22.1% 20.9% 19.9% 19.9% 19.1% 18.8% 19.2% 19.8% 20.2% 21.3% 21.4% 33.5% 28.4% 28.7% 28.7% 26.8% 26.5% 24.9% 25.1% 23.5% 21.0% 20.0% 20.0% 18.6% 17.6% 17.7% 17.3% 16.9% 17.0% 17.8% 18.4% 19.0% 19.2% 5,119 55,965 165,697 174,666 104,187 65,767 80,740 91,297 86,653 67,573 50,095 44,723 49,607 42,077 41,580 33,917 34,235 10,053 43.8% 39.6% 39.7% 39.3% 37.1% 36.3% 33.8% 33.2% 31.0% 28.5% 28.0% 27.0% 25.6% 24.2% 24.1% 23.3% 23.4% 23.3% 41.7% 37.1% 37.5% 37.5% 35.3% 34.2% 31.9% 31.6% 29.2% 26.8% 26.0% 25.5% 24.1% 22.7% 22.5% 21.9% 21.8% 21.6% 5,024 55,719 165,439 173,817 104,749 65,769 80,215 90,791 84,784 66,482 49,494 43,705 48,378 13,377 49.9% 44.9% 44.6% 43.8% 41.2% 40.4% 38.0% 37.2% 35.4% 32.3% 31.3% 30.7% 29.3% 28.5% 48.2% 43.1% 42.9% 42.6% 39.8% 38.8% 36.6% 36.1% 34.2% 30.9% 30.1% 29.5% 28.0% 27.0% 5,007 54,965 162,883 172,579 102,464 64,682 78,427 88,435 81,901 23,439 53.8% 48.8% 48.5% 47.2% 45.0% 43.7% 41.3% 40.8% 39.1% 36.0% 52.3% 47.5% 47.2% 46.2% 43.9% 42.6% 40.3% 39.8% 38.2% 35.0% 1,302,087 26.5% 24.0% 1,203,951 33.4% 31.6% 1,047,743 39.1% 37.7% 834,782 44.7% 43.6% Loan payment status is not reported by servicers after program disqualification (90+ days delinquent). Therefore, 90+ days delinquent loans are included in each of the 60+ and 90+ days delinquent metrics for all future reporting periods, even though some loans may have cured or paid off following program disqualification. In addition, once a loan is reported as paid off it is no longer reflected in future periods. 34 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 7: Performance of HAMP Modifications by Vintage HAMP Tier 2 Mod. Effective in: 2012Q3 2012Q4 2013Q1 2013Q2 2013Q3 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 All Mod. Effective in: 2012Q3 2012Q4 2013Q1 2013Q2 2013Q3 2013Q4 2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 All Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 6 12 3 # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 18 # 60+ Days 90+ Days 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% 946 5.3% 1.3% 1,116 9.9% 5.5% 1,188 23.7% 17.4% 1,246 28.2% 23.3% 2,480 4.3% 1.4% 2,714 12.5% 7.2% 2,875 24.9% 19.5% 2,981 31.1% 26.8% 4,100 5.4% 1.5% 4,452 13.9% 8.0% 5,051 21.9% 17.5% 5,154 29.2% 24.7% 11,188 5.8% 2.0% 13,190 13.8% 8.2% 13,606 22.2% 16.7% 13,513 29.0% 24.7% 11,208 5.9% 1.9% 11,778 11.8% 7.3% 12,587 22.1% 17.0% 12,496 26.8% 23.3% 10,501 4.1% 1.4% 11,610 12.2% 6.7% 12,027 21.6% 17.0% 11,810 26.8% 23.0% 10,876 5.5% 1.4% 11,190 13.0% 7.3% 11,309 20.0% 15.8% 11,211 26.5% 22.2% 9,186 5.7% 1.9% 9,510 12.7% 8.0% 9,985 20.1% 15.4% 9,875 26.5% 22.2% 11,088 5.6% 1.7% 12,731 11.2% 6.4% 12,951 21.3% 16.1% 13,354 26.8% 22.8% 13,109 4.5% 1.2% 14,103 12.0% 6.5% 14,269 22.1% 16.8% 14,231 27.7% 23.4% 13,948 6.0% 1.6% 14,252 14.1% 8.5% 14,332 23.1% 17.9% 4,660 29.4% 24.7% 14,286 6.7% 2.1% 14,718 14.8% 8.8% 15,020 22.8% 18.0% 11,867 6.6% 2.1% 12,128 12.6% 7.5% 4,388 22.7% 17.7% 12,622 4.6% 1.2% 13,123 11.8% 6.4% 4,490 13.5% 7.3% 151,105 12.8% 7.4% 129,588 21.9% 16.9% 100,532 27.5% 23.4% 12,798 5.4% 1.4% 4,156 5.9% 1.7% 154,359 5.5% 1.6% 24 # Delinquency: Months After Conversion to Permanent Modification 36 48 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days # 60+ Days 90+ Days 1 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 33.5% 28.8% 1,284 39.1% 34.6% 47 40.4% 35.8% 32.4% 3,237 38.9% 36.9% 48 41.7% 60+ Days 90+ Days 40.4% 3,013 # 100.0% 1,259 60 41.7% 5,189 32.4% 29.2% 5,264 37.3% 34.8% 13,815 32.0% 28.6% 14,060 37.2% 34.8% 12,637 31.4% 28.0% 4,795 36.8% 34.4% 12,031 30.8% 27.4% 11,029 31.0% 27.7% 9,927 30.6% 27.3% 3,879 29.9% 26.6% 72,780 31.5% 28.1% 28,641 37.4% 34.9% 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. 35 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All 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 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 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 Permanent Modifications Started 84 234 2,999 402 279 2,127 3,802 209 4,863 185 171 72 604 1,304 212 412 182 1,473 620 47,501 2,836 301 1,202 3,155 8,765 19,062 432 2,011 2,834 480 308 425 83 677 1,316 175 338 4,194 59 207 256 254 73 3,208 27,546 711 203 1,093 7,569 Median Monthly Payment Reduction Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PreModification Payment $195.44 $247.31 $298.17 $242.15 $338.40 $350.08 $330.09 $244.05 $394.71 $220.94 $257.88 $288.49 $492.90 $420.98 $221.73 $305.72 $257.49 $347.79 $301.86 $372.88 $483.97 $280.05 $264.91 $324.47 $467.48 $464.87 $308.85 $604.71 $263.74 $261.99 $231.42 $224.09 $199.16 $475.39 $524.62 $287.49 $233.55 $280.85 $339.62 $300.03 $295.22 $264.12 $259.47 $379.63 $614.47 $486.88 $244.19 $468.10 $690.93 34% 35% 37% 33% 34% 34% 33% 32% 34% 34% 37% 33% 32% 36% 32% 34% 37% 34% 34% 37% 38% 29% 35% 33% 37% 33% 35% 36% 32% 38% 35% 34% 34% 34% 36% 28% 35% 33% 34% 31% 36% 31% 41% 34% 35% 34% 34% 32% 39% 36 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Brunswick, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan Statistical Area 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 Permanent Modifications Started 706 296 1,927 494 491 422 1,463 5,505 123 74 433 145 395 325 245 191 3,514 11,200 709 1,638 163 83,848 1,240 7,077 307 265 9,892 712 153 2,278 189 3,055 889 140 6,276 497 119 971 174 17,799 520 70 53 437 645 2,398 223 116 6,683 Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Payment Reduction % of PreReduction Modification Payment $232.24 $329.06 $259.40 $266.98 $423.83 $543.69 $266.64 $465.75 $231.07 $263.99 $520.56 $336.55 $258.04 $356.51 $246.88 $219.18 $347.10 $310.55 $384.33 $276.66 $275.18 $504.51 $454.54 $309.44 $222.24 $261.45 $307.42 $413.30 $222.04 $391.29 $244.41 $267.38 $273.75 $219.48 $318.29 $238.01 $348.52 $411.16 $248.80 $292.66 $260.56 $208.65 $172.03 $349.35 $241.07 $266.41 $222.26 $209.51 $384.35 35% 34% 36% 33% 36% 33% 35% 40% 32% 44% 37% 30% 33% 33% 32% 33% 34% 34% 31% 35% 27% 40% 34% 35% 32% 35% 38% 34% 29% 34% 32% 33% 34% 31% 36% 33% 26% 36% 34% 33% 35% 38% 23% 35% 36% 37% 30% 36% 37% 37 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Dothan, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Dover, DE Metropolitan Statistical Area Dubuque, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Duluth, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area East Stroudsburg, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Eau Claire, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area El Centro, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 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 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 Permanent Modifications Started 13,028 1,641 27,032 222 1,048 119 759 1,582 1,544 269 1,633 1,634 175 674 150 458 1,327 512 75 199 139 801 1,290 354 1,977 610 178 195 924 280 1,008 9,478 204 804 1,197 296 426 228 69 43 613 3,515 380 88 1,187 650 2,963 423 2,725 49 Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Payment Reduction % of PreReduction Modification Payment $404.53 $271.47 $374.38 $217.79 $389.14 $240.41 $281.62 $318.98 $471.33 $288.36 $434.88 $248.23 $240.05 $255.32 $256.99 $239.63 $384.81 $214.47 $382.13 $278.07 $301.31 $236.21 $292.64 $516.62 $322.58 $229.82 $210.17 $301.68 $404.48 $206.66 $242.77 $473.55 $242.28 $331.11 $330.81 $447.40 $331.56 $235.57 $228.97 $219.79 $410.32 $284.67 $520.69 $252.28 $353.78 $343.34 $288.01 $279.01 $260.32 $174.10 33% 32% 39% 31% 30% 33% 34% 35% 40% 33% 35% 34% 31% 33% 41% 39% 33% 33% 27% 31% 27% 35% 34% 34% 37% 33% 33% 36% 31% 30% 35% 37% 33% 36% 36% 37% 38% 35% 30% 32% 32% 34% 40% 29% 30% 38% 35% 35% 32% 32% 38 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA 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 Homosassa Springs, FL 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, 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 Permanent Modifications Started 1,010 1,786 265 1,009 1,333 273 6,542 270 1,187 670 152 509 174 335 18,988 375 756 330 6,438 114 65 698 2,040 369 11,256 201 635 171 301 135 104 261 1,018 959 483 6,502 423 338 425 1,122 2,050 253 163 716 287 308 1,363 4,928 1,260 1,692 Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of Payment Pre-Modification Reduction Payment $266.03 $423.69 $291.53 $419.56 $298.34 $390.06 $447.57 $236.68 $247.76 $513.33 $271.75 $344.64 $312.95 $249.93 $282.52 $238.28 $241.20 $271.59 $271.88 $314.20 $343.54 $290.85 $249.87 $236.17 $367.08 $263.80 $263.72 $204.44 $253.54 $230.15 $216.50 $205.74 $1,019.41 $303.34 $338.09 $311.07 $271.01 $225.24 $249.27 $489.51 $260.92 $238.76 $263.54 $246.24 $263.19 $226.48 $407.66 $363.13 $307.14 $315.46 35% 32% 35% 34% 32% 33% 36% 32% 33% 42% 35% 42% 39% 33% 34% 36% 31% 28% 33% 32% 34% 37% 33% 35% 35% 30% 34% 29% 34% 35% 32% 33% 39% 37% 37% 35% 31% 31% 35% 38% 31% 35% 29% 32% 35% 32% 36% 37% 31% 36% 39 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Laredo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Las Cruces, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Lawrence, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Lawton, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Lebanon, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lewiston, ID-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Lexington-Fayette, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Lima, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Lincoln, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Logan, UT-ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Longview, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Longview, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 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 Permanent Modifications Started 622 408 28,375 182 116 301 108 370 919 246 420 1,433 226 182 461 115,576 3,689 211 527 1,011 1,785 1,301 2,325 70 166 359 93 1,496 1,338 8,579 2,594 85,693 406 120 87 6,647 19,766 273 1,412 7,037 261 795 972 56 304 535 215 663 1,935 1,211 Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PrePayment Modification Payment Reduction $286.77 $328.37 $522.01 $323.89 $214.03 $288.68 $271.11 $331.93 $293.12 $244.26 $265.67 $245.67 $309.26 $227.03 $367.58 $795.70 $265.89 $227.67 $257.37 $277.21 $505.67 $387.04 $477.05 $279.52 $305.98 $241.50 $186.40 $253.00 $460.78 $293.39 $528.31 $531.15 $256.00 $304.10 $248.56 $353.54 $448.26 $412.63 $262.58 $557.54 $207.10 $351.56 $244.11 $379.46 $259.68 $506.05 $211.61 $247.88 $377.43 $812.19 37% 31% 38% 33% 35% 31% 27% 34% 35% 40% 32% 33% 28% 34% 32% 38% 33% 33% 30% 37% 38% 34% 34% 27% 30% 35% 31% 35% 35% 37% 38% 41% 34% 43% 31% 37% 36% 32% 37% 37% 28% 35% 31% 39% 33% 36% 34% 37% 36% 35% 40 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area New Bern, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area New Haven-Milford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area New Orleans-Metairie, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Niles-Benton Harbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Norwich-New London, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Ocala, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Ocean City, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Odessa, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Ogden-Clearfield, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Oklahoma City, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Olympia-Tumwater, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Oshkosh-Neenah, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Owensboro, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Panama City, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Parkersburg-Vienna, WV 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 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 Permanent Modifications Started 2,621 5,755 144 6,506 4,977 124,803 540 5,705 1,606 2,746 673 73 1,972 2,191 1,164 2,013 28,927 308 154 8,083 4,938 698 113 1,926 546 32,895 44,416 108 5,282 286 190 231 5,580 2,797 12,250 1,401 12,204 2,679 703 1,331 822 3,959 165 1,590 1,230 4,191 6,476 71,263 867 450 Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of PrePayment Modification Payment Reduction $601.86 $311.44 $292.79 $470.63 $326.58 $778.67 $278.56 $465.99 $473.10 $353.50 $464.98 $213.97 $350.11 $255.28 $430.69 $273.07 $448.47 $278.89 $194.59 $824.03 $394.01 $384.91 $183.61 $304.14 $221.57 $388.03 $455.65 $225.71 $266.76 $330.01 $248.85 $233.08 $451.34 $438.22 $471.41 $440.12 $525.73 $452.81 $263.00 $440.85 $357.46 $335.21 $310.37 $331.13 $445.49 $523.70 $364.45 $628.25 $278.25 $324.41 41% 33% 38% 36% 36% 39% 35% 39% 37% 37% 33% 32% 28% 34% 32% 34% 38% 35% 34% 35% 38% 37% 29% 35% 34% 33% 37% 37% 36% 33% 30% 37% 39% 35% 34% 36% 37% 32% 35% 41% 36% 32% 33% 33% 34% 36% 32% 37% 32% 33% 41 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA 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 Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Fe, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Maria-Santa Barbara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Rosa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Savannah, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Scranton--Wilkes-Barre--Hazleton, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 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 Stockton-Lodi, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Sumter, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started 2,007 1,596 456 198 23,983 525 1,813 3,695 1,648 6,074 63 4,025 25,848 31,318 108 10,064 4,229 1,662 69 1,638 682 2,823 4,279 1,480 1,693 22,000 1,216 385 239 191 972 230 220 264 1,142 1,022 1,774 236 3,161 839 403 525 1,103 217 12,368 177 201 9,960 259 951 Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Payment Reduction % of PreReduction Modification Payment $262.80 $319.34 $251.18 $237.50 $605.35 $265.65 $383.20 $859.84 $413.23 $417.80 $204.08 $252.17 $751.80 $857.29 $204.15 $948.51 $295.11 $756.96 $217.31 $972.42 $517.63 $727.39 $800.55 $315.31 $280.80 $551.29 $399.84 $393.42 $283.23 $229.60 $241.12 $332.68 $231.70 $229.48 $252.55 $243.59 $326.16 $241.37 $355.92 $262.20 $262.63 $329.03 $527.47 $247.20 $299.60 $322.09 $374.87 $637.65 $225.43 $254.50 36% 38% 36% 31% 36% 37% 34% 40% 35% 32% 31% 32% 36% 37% 33% 37% 37% 36% 27% 38% 35% 38% 36% 34% 36% 34% 38% 43% 32% 32% 33% 37% 35% 26% 36% 32% 33% 37% 34% 34% 38% 32% 36% 37% 36% 31% 36% 37% 35% 36% 42 Making Home Affordable: Appendix Program Performance Report Third Quarter 2016 Appendix 8: All HAMP Activity by MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Tallahassee, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Permanent Modifications Started Median Monthly Median Monthly Payment Reduction % of Payment Pre-Modification Reduction Payment 1,477 $323.07 31% 24,842 $398.99 38% Terre Haute, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 224 $215.14 38% Texarkana, TX-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 119 $198.15 30% The Villages, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 180 $383.00 40% Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 2,422 $264.39 36% Topeka, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 337 $221.80 31% Trenton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,991 $481.74 37% Tucson, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 6,540 $361.40 35% Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,745 $248.21 34% Tuscaloosa, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 419 $282.06 32% Tyler, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 276 $300.59 36% Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Urban Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,148 $754.76 31% Utica-Rome, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 442 $248.85 36% Valdosta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 227 $272.91 31% 6,832 $716.36 36% 56 $230.44 34% Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Victoria, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Vineland-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 899 $358.02 36% Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 8,071 $390.04 32% Visalia-Porterville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,140 $419.03 36% 236 $209.40 33% 94 $336.13 34% 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 375 $277.69 34% 53,866 $632.88 35% 253 $213.40 36% 64 $222.71 33% Wausau, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 214 $295.29 37% Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 170 $232.54 38% Wenatchee, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 327 $377.39 31% Wheeling, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 140 $186.72 33% Wichita Falls, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Williamsport, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 90 $166.29 30% 945 $241.49 34% 192 $199.20 30% 1,227 $378.28 34% Winchester, VA-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 871 $453.14 32% Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 2,061 $275.90 34% Worcester, MA-CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 6,209 $498.03 37% Wilmington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Yakima, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 488 $270.76 32% York-Hanover, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,908 $361.72 32% Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,549 $252.39 37% Yuba City, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,516 $498.86 36% Yuma, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,287 $334.19 35% 43
@FedFRASER