Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Report Highlights

Over 1.6 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through Making Home Affordable

• Nearly 1.2 million homeowners have received a permanent modification through the Home 

Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). These homeowners have reduced their first lien mortgage 

payments by a median of approximately $547 each month – more than one-third of their median 

before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $19.7 billion to date in monthly mortgage 

payments. 

• Homeowners currently in HAMP permanent modifications with some form of principal reduction 

have been granted an estimated $10.2 billion in principal reduction. Of all non-GSE loans eligible for 

principal reduction entering HAMP in April, 67% included a principal reduction feature.

• Nearly 111,000 second lien modifications have been completed through the Second Lien 

Modification Program (2MP). 

• Approximately 154,000 homeowners have exited their homes through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of 

foreclosure with assistance from the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA).

This Month: Q1 2013 Servicer Assessment Results

• For the first quarter of 2013, four servicers were found to need only minor improvement on the 

areas reviewed for program performance, while five servicers were found to need moderate 

improvement. All servicers will need to continue to demonstrate progress in areas identified in 

subsequent program reviews.

• Servicers continue to focus attention on areas identified in previous program reviews and, as a result, 

are demonstrating considerable improvement in program implementation:

• Mortgage servicers continue to appropriately calculate homeowner income, which is used to 

determine a homeowner’s eligibility and modified payment amount under the program. In Q1 

2013, the average income calculation error rate for the top servicers was below 2 percent.

• Servicers are more effectively evaluating homeowners under program eligibility criteria as 

evidenced in the “second look disagree” category, which reflects the rate at which Treasury’s 

program reviews disagree with the servicer’s decision not to assist a homeowner. In Q1 2013, 

the average second look disagree percentage for the top servicers was less than 1 percent.

Note: For information and quarterly updates about the Hardest Hit Fund, please visit the website for the Hardest 

Hit Fund or the TARP Monthly Report to Congress.

Inside:

SUMMARY RESULTS:

Making Home Affordable Program Activity

First Lien Modification Activity

Activity for HAFA, 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP 

and UP

Principal Reduction Activity

First Lien Modification Characteristics 

HAMP Activity by State

HAMP Activity by MSA

SERVICER RESULTS:

First Lien Modification Activity

First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity

Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners

Average Delinquency at Trial Start

Conversion Rate

Time to Resolve Escalations/Homeowner 

Outreach

Disposition of Homeowners Not in 

HAMP

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:

Overview

Servicer Results

Description of Metrics

APPENDICES:

Participants in MHA Programs

 

2

3

4

5-6

7

8

9

 10

11

12

13

14

15

16-18

 

19-25

26-43

44

 

45-46
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Program Purpose

MHA First Lien 

Modifications

The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) provides 

eligible borrowers the opportunity to lower their first lien 

mortgage payment to affordable and sustainable levels through a 

uniform loan modification process. Effective June 2012, HAMP's 

eligibility requirements were expanded to include a "Tier 2" 

evaluation for non-GSE loans that is modeled after the GSE 

Standard Modification and includes properties that are currently 

occupied by a tenant as well as vacant properties the borrower 

intends to rent. FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP provide first lien 

modifications for distressed borrowers in loans guaranteed 

through the Federal Housing Administration and Rural Housing 

Service.

Second Lien Modification 

Program (2MP)

Provides modifications and extinguishments on second liens when 

there has been a first lien HAMP modification on the same 

property.

Home Affordable 

Foreclosure Alternatives 

(HAFA)

Provides transition alternatives to foreclosure in the form of a 

short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. Effective November 

2012, the GSEs jointly streamlined their short sale and deed-in-lieu 

of foreclosure programs. The GSE Standard HAFA program is 

closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program.

Unemployment Program 

(UP)

Provides temporary forbearance of mortgage principal to enable 

unemployed borrowers to look for a new job without fear of 

foreclosure.

The Making Home Affordable Program was launched in March 2009 with the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) which provides assistance to struggling homeowners 

by lowering monthly first lien mortgage payments to an affordable level. Additional programs were subsequently rolled out to expand the program reach.

Making Home Affordable Program Activity

2 Source: HAMP system of record for HAMP, 2MP, HAFA, FHA-HAMP, and RD-HAMP. UP participation is reported via servicer survey 

through March 2013. GSE Standard Modification and GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of 

April 2013.

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

Program-to-Date Reported Since Prior 

Period

MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications 

Started1 1,326,834 20,715

2MP Modifications Started 110,722 1,409

HAFA Transactions Completed2 153,964 13,530

UP Forbearance Plans Started (through 

March 2013) 32,840 686

Cumulative Activity3 1,624,360 36,340

MHA Program Activity

1,137 1,162 1,191 1,219 1,244 1,277 1,299 1,324

1,434

1,475

1,515 1,550

1,588 1,624

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

Mar

2012

Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2013

Feb Mar Apr

Cumulative MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative Transactions Completed

1 Includes (a) 1,190,605 GSE and Non-GSE HAMP permanent modifications, (b) 13,792 FHA- and RD-HAMP 

modifications, and (c) 122,437 GSE Standard Modifications since October 2011 under the GSEs’ Servicer 

Alignment Initiative. The GSEs and other government agencies also undertake other foreclosure prevention 

activities beyond their participation in MHA which is not reflected in this report. Per the Federal Housing Finance 

Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the Fourth Quarter of 2012, since 4Q 2008 the GSEs have completed 

more than 1.3 million permanent modifications and nearly 450,000 short sales and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure 

actions, which includes their activity under MHA. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. As 

reported in the May 2013 edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing Scorecard, FHA has offered more than 

1.8 million loss mitigation and early delinquency interventions through April 30, 2013 since April 1, 2009, which 

includes their activity under MHA.

2 Includes the GSE and Non-GSE activity under the MHA program, in addition to the cumulative GSE Standard 

HAFA transactions completed since November 2012. Does not include other GSE short sale and deed-in-lieu 

activity prior to November 2012 outside the GSE Standard HAFA program. 3 This does not include trial modifications that have cancelled or not yet converted to permanent modifications, 

or HAFA transactions started but not yet completed.
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

HAMP (First Lien) Modifications

3

HAMP Trials Started

Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. For example, 16,703 trials have entered the 

HAMP system of record since the prior report; 14,797 were trials with a first payment recorded in April 2013. 

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

Source: HAMP system of record. 

910 933 951 974 994 1,009 1,026 1,043 1,060 1,077 1,091 1,107 1,122 1,136 1,151 1,167 1,179 1,191

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

Nov

2011

Dec Jan

2012

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2013

Feb Mar Apr

All Permanent Modifications Started 

(000s)

1,756

1,775 1,790

1,808

1,829

1,847

1,865

1,883

1,898

1,916

1,930

1,947 1,964 1,977

1,989

2,002

2,019 2,033

0

50

100

1,600

1,650

1,700

1,750

1,800

1,850

1,900

1,950

2,000

2,050

2,100

Nov

2011

Dec Jan

2012

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2013

Feb Mar Apr

New Trials Started (000s)

All Trials Started (000s)

HAMP Activity Through April 2013 Total

Trial

Modifications

All Trials Started 2,033,329

 Tier 1 2,017,588

 Tier 2 15,741

Trials Reported Since March 2013 Report1 16,703

Trial Modifications Canceled Since June 1, 20102 68,575

Active Trials 67,855

Permanent 

Modifications

All Permanent Modifications Started 1,190,605

 Tier 1 1,185,586

 Tier 2 5,019

Permanent Modifications Reported Since 

March 2013 Report3 11,966

Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)4 306,611

Active Permanent Modifications 870,038

1 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. 2 774,869 cumulative including 706,294 that had trial start dates prior to June 1, 2010 when Treasury implemented a verified 

income requirement.

3 Per program guidance, servicers began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This process requires reverting the impacted 

permanent modifications in the HAMP system of record to an active trial with re-boarding of some of these permanent 

modifications in subsequent months. As a result, fluctuations are expected in the monthly activity reported in the near term. 4 A permanent modification disqualifies when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Does not include 

13,956 loans paid off.

Estimated Eligible Loans and Borrowers

Under the original HAMP program, launched in March 2009, now referred to as “Tier 1,” eligible loans include 

conventional loans more than 60 days delinquent (unless the borrower is in imminent default), that originated on 

or before January 1, 2009 with a current unpaid principal balance below the maximum conforming loan limit5

and were owner-occupied at origination.

Homeowners who have HAMP-eligible loans may qualify for Tier 1 if they meet additional criteria including, but 

not limited to requiring: a debt-to-income ratio greater than 31%, occupancy, employment, and pooling and 

servicing agreement eligibility. Based on current estimates, of the 3.8 million homeowners who are currently 

60+ days delinquent, an estimated 600,000 homeowners are potentially eligible for HAMP Tier 1.

On January 27, 2012, Treasury announced an expansion of the eligibility for HAMP to reduce additional 

foreclosures and help stabilize neighborhoods. The eligibility was expanded for non-GSE loans to (1) allow for 

more flexible debt-to-income criteria and (2) include properties that are currently occupied by a tenant, as well 

as vacant properties which the borrower intends to rent. This expanded HAMP criteria, referred to as HAMP 

“Tier 2,” became effective on June 1, 2012 (although not all servicers began offering Tier 2 modifications on that 

date). There is insufficient program data at this time to estimate the number of homeowners who may qualify 

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

Units: $1,403,400.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

4

The Treasury MHA Unemployment Program (UP) provides a temporary forbearance to homeowners 

who are unemployed. Under Treasury guidelines, unemployed homeowners must be considered for a 

minimum of 12 months’ forbearance. 

All UP Forbearance Plans Started 32,840

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 28,082

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 4,758

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

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

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

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

mortgages.

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started 25,291

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 13,764

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity 

The Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) provides assistance to homeowners in a first lien 

permanent modification who have an eligible second lien with a participating HAMP servicer. This 

assistance can result in a modification of the second lien and even full or partial extinguishment of the 

second lien. Second lien modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest 

rate reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

2MP modifications and partial extinguishments require that the first lien HAMP modification be 

permanent and active and that the second lien have an unpaid balance of $5,000 or more and a 

monthly payment of at least $100. 

All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1 110,722

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 27,804

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2 10,309

Active Second Lien Modifications3 72,609

Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments 7,816

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Median Amount of Full Extinguishment $61,285 

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second Lien Modifications $9,666 

1 Includes second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for April 

2013 data, though the effective date may occur in May 2013. Number of modifications is net of 

cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

2 Includes 2,905 loans paid off. 3 Includes 5,813 loans in active non-payment status whereby the 1MP has disqualified from HAMP. As a 

result, the servicer is no longer required to report payment activity on the 2MP modification.

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity

Non-GSE Activity GSE Activity1 Total

Short Sale 108,335 42,207 150,542

Deed-in-Lieu 3,140 282 3,422

Total Transactions Completed 111,475 42,489 153,964

The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA) offers incentives and a streamlined 

process for homeowners looking to exit their homes through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of 

foreclosure. HAFA has established important homeowner protections and an industry standard for 

streamlined transactions. Effective November 2012, the GSEs revised their short sale and deed-in-lieu 

programs. The GSE Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program. In 

HAFA transactions, homeowners:

• Follow a streamlined process for short sales and deed-in-lieu transactions that requires no 

verification of income (unless as required by investors) and allows for pre-approved short sale 

terms;

• Receive a waiver of deficiency once the transaction is completed that releases the 

homeowner from remaining mortgage debt;

• Receive at least $3,000 in relocation assistance at closing.

1 Includes GSE activity under the MHA program in addition to the GSE Standard HAFA program implemented in 

November 2012. GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of April 2013. Does not 

include other GSE short sale and deed-in-lieu activity outside the HAFA program. Per the Federal Housing 

Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the Fourth Quarter of 2012, since 4Q 2008 the GSEs have 

completed nearly 450,000 short sales and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure actions, which includes their activity 

under MHA. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Principal reduction may be offered to any non-GSE HAMP modifications, and servicers are required to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for non-GSE mortgages with a loan-to-value ratio greater 

than 115% when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP first lien modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for principal reduction, they are not required to reduce principal as part 

of the modification. The MHA Program allows servicers to provide principal reduction on HAMP modifications in two ways: 1) under HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA), principal is reduced to 

lower the LTV, the investor is eligible to receive an incentive on the amount of principal reduced, and the reduction vests over a 3-year period and 2) servicers can also offer principal reduction to 

homeowners on a HAMP modification outside the requirements of HAMP PRA. If they do, the investor receives no incentive payment for the principal reduction and the principal reduction can be 

recognized immediately. 

To encourage investors to consider or expand the use of HAMP PRA, Treasury issued program guidance on February 16, 2012 tripling financial incentives under HAMP PRA for investors who agree to reduce 

principal for eligible underwater homeowners. The new program guidance applies to all permanent modifications of non-GSE loans under HAMP that include HAMP PRA and have a trial period plan effective 

date on or after March 1, 2012. HAMP PRA can be a feature of a HAMP trial or permanent modification.

5

HAMP Principal Reduction

HAMP Principal Reduction Activity Modification Characteristics

While the population of loan modifications with principal reduction is still relatively small, 

program data indicates that modifications with principal reduction are comprised of more 

homeowners seriously delinquent at the time of trial start than the overall population of HAMP 

homeowners. Overall, homeowners receiving permanent loan modifications with principal 

reduction also have a higher before-modification LTV ratio than those without it.

HAMP Modifications 

with Earned 

Principal Reduction 

Under PRA1

HAMP 

Modifications 

with Upfront 

Principal 

Reduction 

Outside of PRA

Total HAMP 

Modifications 

with Principal 

Reduction

All Trial Modifications Started 127,919 41,893 169,812

Trials Reported Since March 2013 

Report 4,176 1,350 5,526

Active Trial Modifications 15,029 4,152 19,181

All Permanent Modifications Started 102,456 34,478 136,934

Permanent Modifications Reported 

Since March 2013 Report 3,239 1,065 4,304

Active Permanent Modifications 87,700 30,011 117,711

Median Principal Amount Reduced for 

Active Permanent Modifications2 $73,370 $56,512 $67,644 

Median Principal Amount Reduced for 

Active Permanent Modifications (%)3 32.1% 18.0% 29.5%

Total Outstanding Principal Balance 

Reduced on Active Permanent 

Modifications 2

$8,138,152,198 $2,048,408,399 $10,186,560,597 

1 Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA. 2 Under HAMP PRA, principal reduction vests over a 3-year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount 

that may be forgiven. 3 HAMP PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization.

4 Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without principal reduction. 5 Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications. 6 Because the first step of the standard HAMP waterfall includes the capitalization of accrued interest, out-ofpocket escrow advances to third parties, any escrow advances made to third parties during the trial period 

plan, and servicing advances that are made for costs and expenses incurred in performing servicing 

obligations, this can result in an increase in the principal balance after modification. As a result, the loan-tovalue ratio can increase in the modification process.

All HAMP 

Modifications4

Total HAMP 

Modifications 

with Principal 

Reduction

Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:

- At least 60 days delinquent 80% 84%

- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default 20% 16%

Top three States by Activity5, Percent of Total Activity: 

- California 26% 35%

- Florida 12% 15%

- Illinois 5% 5%

Top Three States’ Percent of Total 43% 56%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio:

- Before Modification 119% 152%

- After Modification6 117% 115%

Active Permanent Modifications – Median before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio:

- Front-End DTI 45.5% 46.2%

- Back-End DTI 70.3% 60.5%
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

6

HAMP Principal Reduction

28%

36%

43%

46% 46% 46% 45%

56%

59% 60% 60% 61% 61%

54% 54% 55% 53% 55%

58%

62% 62% 61% 61%

56% 56% 55% 55% 55%

37%

44% 45% 46% 46% 46% 45%

56%

59% 61% 60% 62% 63%

67% 66%

69% 71% 74%

77%

81%

77% 78% 78%

72%

70% 71% 69% 67%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

Jan-11 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan-12 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan-13 Feb Mar Apr

Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible 

Loans 1

PRA All Principal Reduction2

The terms of the $25 billion National Mortgage Settlement regarding mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five largest mortgage servicers, 

the Federal government, and 49 state attorneys general, have caused servicers to increase the use of non-PRA principal reductions. Of non-GSE 

loans eligible1 for principal reduction that started a trial in April 2013, 67% included a principal reduction feature. Only 55% offered principal 

reduction through the HAMP PRA program. The remaining HAMP trial modifications with a principal reduction feature were granted outside the 

requirements of HAMP PRA, where the investor does not receive a financial incentive for the principal reduction. Principal reductions granted 

outside of the HAMP PRA program since February 2012 are likely attributable to the National Mortgage Settlement. 

1 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. 2 All Principal Reduction population consists of trials that have any principal reduction, including those with HAMP PRA.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics

7

Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated to total approximately $19.7 billion, program to date, compared 

with unmodified mortgage obligations. The median monthly savings for homeowners in active permanent first lien modifications is $546.81, or 39% of the median monthly payment 

before modification. 

• Of all HAMP trial modifications started, 80% of homeowners were at least 60 days 

delinquent at trial start. The rest were up to 59 days delinquent or current and in 

imminent default. 

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

properties. 

Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications

Loan Characteristic Before 

Modification

After 

Modification

Median 

Decrease

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2

 Tier 1 45.6% 31.0% -15.0 pct pts

 Tier 2 40.6% 30.7% -8.2 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio3

 Tier 1 70.4% 52.0% -15.2 pct pts

 Tier 2 55.0% 43.5% -8.3 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing 

Payment4

 Tier 1 $1,418.93 $803.69 ($548.04)

 Tier 2 $1,269.67 $849.75 ($366.97)

2 Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo fees) to monthly gross

income. 

3 Ratio of total monthly debt payments (including mortgage principal and interest, taxes, insurance, homeowners association and/or 

condo fees, plus payments on installment debts, junior liens, alimony, car lease payments and investment property payments) to 

monthly gross income. Homeowners who have a back-end debt-to-income ratio of greater than 55% are required to seek housing 

counseling under program guidelines.

4 Principal and interest payment. Before modification payment is homeowner’s current payment at time of evaluation.

Modification Steps of Active Permanent Modifications

Modification Step Tier 1 Tier 2

Interest Rate Reduction 96.6% 73.1%

Term Extension 62.1% 82.1%

Principal Forbearance 32.9% 22.0%

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent modifications 

are:

• 68.1% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or unemployment)

• 10.6% reported excessive obligation

• 3.5% reported an illness of the principal borrower

HAMP modifications follow a series of waterfall steps. The modification steps include 

interest rate adjustment, term extension and principal forbearance.

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

to 10-55%.

• Under Tier 1, servicers apply the modification steps in sequence until the 

homeowner’s after modification front-end debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is 31%. The 

impact of each modification step can vary to achieve the target of 31%. 

• Under Tier 2, servicers apply consistent modification terms resulting in the 

homeowner’s post modification DTI falling within an allowable target range.1 

Active permanent modifications reflect the following modification steps:

Homeowner Characteristics

• Tier 2 provides another modification opportunity for struggling homeowners who 

did not qualify for Tier 1 or received a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification but lost 

good standing. Of the Tier 2 trial modifications started:

• 29% were previously in a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification.

• 20% were previously evaluated for Tier 1 and did not meet eligibility 

requirements.

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

• The median credit score of homeowners in the program is 575.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

8

Note: Includes active trial and permanent 

modifications from the official HAMP system of 

record.

Source: 1st Quarter 2013 

National Delinquency 

Survey, Mortgage 

Bankers Association.

State

Active 

Trials

Permanent 

Modifications

State 

Total1

% of 

U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity State

Active 

Trials

Permanent 

Modifications

State 

Total1

% of 

U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

AK 31 409 440 0.0% MT 68 998 1,066 0.1%

AL 469 4,680 5,149 0.5% NC 1,383 15,352 16,735 1.8%

AR 195 1,822 2,017 0.2% ND 6 131 137 0.0%

AZ 1,344 33,833 35,177 3.8% NE 99 1,139 1,238 0.1%

CA 15,427 226,384 241,811 25.8% NH 302 3,828 4,130 0.4%

CO 847 12,302 13,149 1.4% NJ 2,594 27,916 30,510 3.3%

CT 1,055 11,063 12,118 1.3% NM 311 2,883 3,194 0.3%

DC 104 1,536 1,640 0.2% NV 1,144 18,997 20,141 2.1%

DE 205 2,549 2,754 0.3% NY 4,545 43,843 48,388 5.2%

FL 8,430 105,458 113,888 12.1% OH 1,609 17,965 19,574 2.1%

GA 2,415 30,962 33,377 3.6% OK 252 1,968 2,220 0.2%

HI 253 3,381 3,634 0.4% OR 787 9,788 10,575 1.1%

IA 171 2,017 2,188 0.2% PA 1,887 17,582 19,469 2.1%

ID 213 3,255 3,468 0.4% RI 308 4,155 4,463 0.5%

IL 3,450 44,874 48,324 5.2% SC 766 7,721 8,487 0.9%

IN 736 7,991 8,727 0.9% SD 21 297 318 0.0%

KS 205 2,002 2,207 0.2% TN 847 8,521 9,368 1.0%

KY 294 3,121 3,415 0.4% TX 2,414 23,318 25,732 2.7%

LA 481 4,798 5,279 0.6% UT 424 7,716 8,140 0.9%

MA 1,779 20,742 22,521 2.4% VA 1,564 20,550 22,114 2.4%

MD 2,355 27,292 29,647 3.2% VT 93 734 827 0.1%

ME 234 2,386 2,620 0.3% WA 1,522 18,404 19,926 2.1%

MI 1,461 25,819 27,280 2.9% WI 709 8,043 8,752 0.9%

MN 746 13,614 14,360 1.5% WV 83 1,137 1,220 0.1%

MO 738 8,342 9,080 1.0% WY 32 403 435 0.0%

MS 312 2,891 3,203 0.3% Other2 135 3,126 3,261 0.3%

1 Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

2 Includes Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

60+ Day Delinquency Rate

 

 Below 5.0% 1 10.01% - 15.0% 20.01% 

 5.0% - 10.0% 15.01% - 20.0% and higher

HAMP Modifications

 5,000 and lower 20,001 – 35,000

 5,001 – 10,000 35,001 and higher

 10,001 – 20,000 

HAMP Activity by State Modification Activity by State

Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

A complete list of HAMP activity for all metropolitan areas is available at

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/results/MHA-Reports/

Metropolitan Statistical Area Active Trials

Active Permanent

Modifications

Total MSA HAMP 

Activity1

% of U.S. HAMP 

Activity

Median $ 

Payment Reduction

Median % Payment 

Reduction2

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 5,451 72,501 77,952 8.3% $875.94 41%

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 5,566 58,180 63,746 6.8% $889.71 43%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 3,817 46,565 50,382 5.4% $585.97 45%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 3,326 43,592 46,918 5.0% $571.44 44%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 2,611 43,502 46,113 4.9% $691.21 40%

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 2,175 29,017 31,192 3.3% $697.97 38%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 971 26,944 27,915 3.0% $502.26 41%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1,856 25,033 26,889 2.9% $412.20 40%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,469 20,220 21,689 2.3% $934.24 40%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,130 16,573 17,703 1.9% $810.71 39%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 927 15,498 16,425 1.8% $573.00 42%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 1,060 15,360 16,420 1.8% $497.96 42%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 833 15,554 16,387 1.7% $417.85 41%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 1,221 14,956 16,177 1.7% $683.84 38%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA 925 14,671 15,596 1.7% $654.06 39%

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

1 Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

2 Reflects % of the median monthly payment before modification for active permanent 

modifications.

9
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Servicer 

Trial Plan 

Offers 

Extended1 

All HAMP 

Trials 

Started2

All HAMP 

Permanent 

Modifications

Started2

Active Trial 

Modifications2

Active Trial 

Modifications 

Lasting 6 

Months or 

Longer3

Active 

Permanent 

Modifications2

Total Active Modifications4

GSE Private Portfolio Total

Bank of America, N.A. 573,878 329,692 158,652 13,104 6,656 113,524 59,601 55,218 11,809 126,628

CitiMortgage, Inc. 216,379 142,916 69,165 3,263 1,277 52,946 32,874 5,797 17,538 56,209

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 5 95,323 67,780 50,410 2,716 86 35,259 16,596 7,157 14,222 37,975

JPMorgan Chase Bank, 

N.A. 425,876 340,860 196,719 9,917 1,598 147,250 68,512 59,742 28,913 157,167

Ocwen Loan Servicing, 

LLC5 178,546 221,130 148,177 10,443 1,619 101,667 14,119 96,703 1,288 112,110

OneWest Bank 99,439 67,362 45,221 1,602 55 35,472 15,325 18,684 3,065 37,074

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 80,133 68,524 39,223 3,136 395 25,918 495 24,965 3,594 29,054

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 261,832 293,844 165,141 11,994 2,742 126,729 55,562 24,644 58,517 138,723

Other Servicers 325,311 501,221 317,897 11,680 1,431 231,273 192,613 31,461 18,879 242,953

Total 2,256,717 2,033,329 1,190,605 67,855 15,859 870,038 455,697 324,371 157,825 937,893

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer and Investor Type

10

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

1 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through April 30, 2013. 

2 As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes FHA-HAMP modifications. Subject to adjustment based 

on servicer reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing transfers. Servicers may enter new trial 

modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time.

3 These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to permanent modifications, but not reported as such to 

the HAMP system of record. Per program guidance, servicers recently began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This 

process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with re-boarding 

of some of these permanent modifications in subsequent months. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, 

these modifications are reported as Active Trials. Many of these loans are 6 months or more beyond their first trial 

payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trial. As a result, fluctuations over the next few reporting 

cycles are expected in this population.

4 Total active modifications reflects active trial and active permanent HAMP modifications.

5 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.. 

The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in future reports. Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc. 

was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition is reflected in this report. 
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

11

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1

1 MHA Program Effective Dates:

 HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009

 PRA: October 1, 2010

 2MP: August 13, 2009

 HAFA: April 5, 2010

2 While both GSE and non-GSE loans are eligible for HAMP, at the present time due to 

GSE policy, servicers can only offer PRA on non-GSE modifications under HAMP. 

Servicer volume can vary based on the investor composition of the servicer’s portfolio 

and respective policy with regards to PRA. 

3 As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes FHA-HAMP 

modifications. Subject to adjustment based on servicer reconciliation of historic loan 

files. Totals reflect impact of servicing transfers. Servicers may enter new trial 

modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time.

4 Number of second lien modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily 

due to servicer data corrections.

5 Servicer agreement with homeowner for terms of potential short sale, which lasts at 

least 120 days; or agreement for a deed-in-lieu transaction. A short sale requires a thirdparty purchaser and cooperation of junior lienholders and mortgage insurers to 

complete the transaction. Includes Non-GSE activity under the MHA program only. 

Servicer GSE program data not available. 

6 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were 

acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in 

future reports. Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc. was acquired 

by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition is reflected in this report. 

N/A – Servicer does not participate in the program.

HAMP First Lien Modifications Principal Reduction Alternative 

(PRA)2

Second Lien 

Modification (2MP)

Home Affordable 

Foreclosure 

Alternatives (HAFA)5

Servicer Trials

Started3

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started3

Trials 

Started3

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started3

Second Lien 

Modifications 

Started4

Transactions 

Completed

Bank of America, N.A. 329,692 158,652 13,834 11,485 35,400 36,289

CitiMortgage, Inc. 142,916 69,165 2,640 2,114 13,662 814

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 6 67,780 50,410 4,284 2,997 4,822 4,677

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 340,860 196,719 31,122 26,153 32,044 31,996

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC6 221,130 148,177 35,902 26,795 N/A 4,915

OneWest Bank 67,362 45,221 6,904 5,984 3,586 4,069

Select Portfolio Servicing 68,524 39,223 2,794 2,495 N/A 3,513

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 293,844 165,141 25,197 19,951 16,324 18,049

Other Servicers 501,221 317,897 5,242 4,482 4,884 7,153

Total 2,033,329 1,190,605 127,919 102,456 110,722 111,475

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

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

12

1 Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before Jan. 1, 2009; excludes loans with current unpaid principal balances greater than current conforming loan limits, FHA and VA loans, loans 

where investor pooling and servicing agreements preclude modification, and manufactured housing loans with title/chattel issues that exclude them from HAMP. Treasury has expanded HAMP's eligibility criteria to include a "Tier 2" evaluation 

designed to provide help for borrowers with a financial hardship whose debt-to-income ratio is below 31 percent, who have properties occupied by a tenant or who have vacant properties that the borrower intends to rent. Servicers began 

accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification requests as of 6/1/2012 and are including HAMP Tier 2 eligible loans in the outreach survey data shown here. 2 Right Party Contact (RPC) is achieved when a servicer has successfully communicated directly with the homeowner obligated under the mortgage about resolution of their delinquency in accordance with program guidelines. The RPC ratio reflects 

the share of homeowners with which the servicer has established RPC as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer needed. 3 HAMP evaluations complete ratio reflects the share of homeowners who have been evaluated for HAMP as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer needed. Evaluated homeowners 

include those offered a trial plan, those that are denied or did not accept a trial plan and homeowners that failed to submit a complete HAMP evaluation package by program-specified timelines.

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

12

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

Per program guidance, servicers are directed to establish Right Party Contact (RPC) with homeowners of delinquent HAMP eligible 

loans1 and then evaluate the homeowners' eligibility for HAMP. There is a range of performance results across top program servicers 

with respect to making RPC and completing the evaluations.

81% 83%

94%

69% 72%

79%

66% 67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Right Party Contact Ratio2 HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

81%

94%

91%

98%

77%

94%

89%

76%
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Average Homeowner Delinquency at Trial Start1

1 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.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Days

13

Servicers are instructed to follow a series of steps in order to evaluate homeowners for HAMP, including:

• Identifying and soliciting the homeowners in the early stages of delinquency; 

• Making reasonable efforts to establish right party contact with the homeowners; 

• Gathering required documentation once contact is established in order to evaluate the homeowners for a HAMP trial; and, 

• Communicating decisions to the homeowners.

Effective 10/1/11, a new servicer compensation structure exists to encourage servicers to work with struggling homeowners in the early stages of delinquency with the highest 

incentives paid for permanent modifications completed when the homeowner is 120 days delinquent or less at the trial start.

Maximum servicer incentive is paid for 

converting a permanent modification 

that was 120 days delinquent or less at 

trial start.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

85% 88% 88% 90%

85%

92%

83%

90%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Conversion Rate

Conversion Rate1

14

Average Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10

88% Converted to Permanent Modification

3% Pending Processing or Decision

Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010, all trials must be started using verified income documentation. Of eligible trials started on or after June 1, 2010, 

88% have converted to permanent modifications with an average trial length of 3.5 months. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers initiated trials using stated 

income information. Of trials started prior to June 1, 2010, 44% have converted to permanent modifications. 

1 Chart depicts conversion rates as measured against trials eligible to convert – those three months in trial, or four months if the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial 

modification start. Permanent modifications transferred among servicers are credited to the originating servicer. Trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current servicer’s 

population.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Days

Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Current Quarter

Servicers are required to resolve borrower inquiries and disputes that are escalated by the MHA Support Centers. Escalated cases include allegations that the servicer did not properly assess the 

homeowner according to program guidelines, inappropriately denied the homeowner for applicable MHA program(s), or initiated or continued inappropriate foreclosure actions. Effective February 1, 

2011, the servicers are directed to review and resolve non-GSE escalated cases within 30 calendar days from receipt of the case by the escalating party. Over the last four quarters, 7 of the 8 largest 

servicers’ non-GSE resolved cases have an average resolution time at or below the 30 day target.

15

1 Non-GSE escalations only; excludes cases escalated to the MHA Support Centers but not yet escalated to servicers. Average resolution time calculation excludes cases referred to servicers prior to February 1, 2011, 'Investor denial' cases referred to 

servicers between February 1, 2011 and November 1, 2011, cases involving bankruptcy, and cases that did not require servicer actions. 2 Target of 30 calendar days includes an estimated 5 days of processing by MHA Support Centers.

3 Resolved cases include all escalations resolved on or after February 1, 2011 through April 30, 2013 and exclude those that did not require servicer actions.

Source: MHA Support Centers. 

Servicer Time to Resolve Non-GSE Escalations: Average Resolution Time by Quarter in Which Escalations were Resolved1

Target: 30 Calendar Days2

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo 

Resolved Cases3

GSE Cases 7,022 1,082 435 2,377 332 573 9 1,865

Non-GSE Cases 8,856 787 693 3,672 3,433 813 371 3,908

Total 15,878 1,869 1,128 6,049 3,765 1,386 380 5,773

Active Cases Total 106 6 0 53 23 14 8 41

Select Measures of Homeowners’ Experience with MHA

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures Program to Date

Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by Treasury and Partners (cumulative) 84

Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events (cumulative) 73,454

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)3 9,285,241

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (April 2013) 2,442,970

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative) 172,411,291

2 Reflects updates made to include additional call types referred for free housing counseling 3 Source: Survey data provided by SPA servicers. Servicers are encouraged by HAMP to solicit information from borrowers 60+ days 

delinquent, regardless of eligibility for a HAMP modification.

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Volume1 Program 

to Date April

Total Number of Calls Taken at 1-888-995-HOPE 3,787,284 61,113

Borrowers Referred for Free Housing Counseling Assistance 

Through the Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline2 2,081,316 32,454

1 Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records. 
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Disposition Path 

Homeowners in Disqualified HAMP Permanent Modifications

Survey Data Through March 2013 (Largest Servicers)

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

Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Permanent modifications that have been disqualified, but no further action has yet been taken. 

2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. 

Note: Excludes disqualifications pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios. 

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

• In the event the homeowner cannot bring a delinquent HAMP modification current without additional assistance, the servicer is prevented from commencing foreclosure proceedings until the 

borrower is evaluated for any other loss mitigation action, including other types of modifications or short sales.

• The majority of homeowners who fall out of HAMP receive an alternative to foreclosure, including but not limited to HAMP Tier 2, an unemployment forbearance, assistance through the 

Hardest Hit Fund, an alternative modification, or a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. 

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

16

Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Permanent Modification Disqualified:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy in 

Process

Borrower

Became 

Current

Alternative 

Modification Payment Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-in-Lieu

Foreclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions Total

Bank of America, N.A. 5,421 2,131 3,886 10,017 2,121 442 7,424 4,834 6,141 42,417

CitiMortgage Inc. 1,754 2,033 1,298 2,411 586 104 1,782 1,115 1,860 12,943

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 2,082 651 1,119 2,126 237 116 2,062 1,957 2,480 12,830

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 6,155 2,183 3,793 13,183 1,600 221 7,065 8,220 3,492 45,912

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 5,636 1,638 2,311 20,205 4,038 186 921 5,055 1,262 41,252

OneWest Bank 1,010 588 994 1,123 1,017 27 1,315 1,812 1,386 9,272

Select Portfolio Servicing 2,817 567 639 3,303 731 32 1,409 1,359 1,428 12,285

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 2,312 2,712 1,042 14,695 1,285 527 3,151 1,838 5,949 33,511

TOTAL 

(These Largest Servicers)

27,187 12,503 15,082 67,063 11,615 1,655 25,129 26,190 23,998 210,422

12.9% 5.9% 7.2% 31.9% 5.5% 0.8% 11.9% 12.4% 11.4% 100.0%
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Disposition Path 

Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through March 2013 (Largest Servicers)

Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy in 

Process

Borrower

Became Current

Alternative 

Modification

Payment 

Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-in-Lieu

Foreclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions Total

Bank of America, N.A. 4,968 3,183 10,952 50,187 973 8,410 22,807 10,146 38,972 150,598

CitiMortgage Inc. 2,877 7,033 6,541 23,309 1,483 3,155 6,311 3,228 12,225 66,162

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 212 158 690 6,472 13 851 1,549 1,133 2,630 13,708

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 3,914 3,214 21,869 36,222 1,396 3,779 16,067 9,903 20,158 116,522

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 2,549 1,936 2,645 27,129 2,770 1,024 1,777 5,922 5,444 51,196

OneWest Bank 682 621 604 6,346 593 209 2,269 3,019 6,069 20,412

Select Portfolio Servicing 2,783 509 1,966 8,408 346 396 2,407 2,062 5,362 24,239

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 898 4,652 8,553 44,825 225 11,108 7,750 8,061 29,350 115,422

TOTAL 

(These Largest Servicers)

18,883 21,306 53,820 202,898 7,799 28,932 60,937 43,474 120,210 558,259

3.4% 3.8% 9.6% 36.3% 1.4% 5.2% 10.9% 7.8% 21.5% 100%

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

Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Trial loans that have been canceled, but no further action has yet been taken. 2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. 

Note: Excludes cancellations pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios. 

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

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Disposition Path 

Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through March 2013 (Largest Servicers)

Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy in 

Process

Borrower

Became Current

Alternative 

Modification

Payment 

Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-in-Lieu

Foreclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions Total

Bank of America, N.A. 13,672 10,554 67,369 110,247 4,040 33,051 49,352 28,025 73,299 389,609

CitiMortgage Inc. 8,749 19,967 27,942 45,879 6,450 6,112 20,087 11,414 27,604 174,204

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 5,681 2,887 31,326 48,118 864 15,431 16,928 11,375 20,979 153,589

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 19,874 16,082 140,132 152,176 8,292 78,908 77,806 44,061 53,858 591,189

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 9,786 6,312 27,297 133,146 11,482 7,467 9,193 18,043 17,301 240,027

OneWest Bank 4,552 3,385 36,201 29,855 5,183 7,171 10,197 11,166 18,223 125,933

Select Portfolio Servicing 9,985 833 6,876 4,958 349 661 3,624 4,421 3,747 35,454

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 11,160 12,592 60,392 59,959 1,238 29,126 33,873 26,093 41,144 275,577

TOTAL 

(These Largest Servicers)

83,459 72,612 397,535 584,338 37,898 177,927 221,060 154,598 256,155 1,985,582

4.2% 3.7% 20.0% 29.4% 1.9% 9.0% 11.1% 7.8% 12.9% 100.0%

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

Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, but no further action has yet been taken. 2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. 

Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios. 

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

Overview

Background

Since the Making Home Affordable Program’s (MHA) inception in the spring 

of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage 

servicers. Treasury has been publicly reporting information about servicer 

performance through two types of data: compliance data, which reflects 

servicer compliance with specific MHA guidelines; and program results data, 

which reflects how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible 

homeowners and report program activity. 

When MHA began, most servicers did not have the staff, procedures, or 

systems in place to respond to the volume of homeowners struggling to pay 

their mortgages, or to respond to the housing crisis generally. Very few 

mortgage modifications were even occurring. Treasury sought to get 

servicers to join MHA and to improve their operations quickly, so as to 

implement a national mortgage modification program. 

Through ongoing compliance reviews, Treasury has required participating 

servicers to take specific actions to improve their servicing processes. While 

the servicers have improved their performance, they still have more progress 

to make. Toward that end, Treasury is publishing servicer assessments for 

the largest servicers participating in MHA. Not only do the assessments 

provide more transparency to the public about servicer performance in the 

program, but the assessments are also intended to encourage servicers to 

correct identified instances of non-compliance. 

Servicer participation in MHA is voluntary, based on a contract with Fannie 

Mae as financial agent on behalf of Treasury. Although Treasury does not 

regulate these institutions and does not have the authority to impose fines 

or penalties, Treasury can, pursuant to the contract, take certain remedial 

actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such 

remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of 

non-compliance, as noted above. In addition, Treasury can implement 

financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to 

servicers. Such incentive payments, which are the only payments Treasury 

makes for the benefit of servicers under the program, include payments for 

every successful permanent modification under the Home Affordable 

Modification Program, and payments for completed short sale/deed-in-lieu 

transactions pursuant to the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative 

Program.

It is important to note that Treasury’s compliance work related to MHA 

applies only to those servicers that have agreed to participate in MHA for 

mortgage loans that are not owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie 

Mac (Government Sponsored Enterprises, or GSEs). Treasury cannot and 

does not perform compliance reviews of (1) mortgage loans or activities that 

fall outside of MHA, (2) GSE loans or (3) those loans insured through the 

Federal Housing Administration. For each servicer, the loans that are eligible 

for MHA represent only a portion of that servicer’s overall mortgage 

servicing operation.

Treasury’s foremost goal is to assist struggling homeowners who may be 

eligible for MHA. These servicer assessments set a new benchmark for 

providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing 

against key metrics. But, in addition to this direct effect, MHA has had an 

important indirect effect on the market as well. MHA has established 

standards that have improved mortgage modifications across the industry, 

and has led to important changes in the way mortgage servicers assist 

struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how 

mortgage modifications should be designed so that they are sustainable, 

standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as 

efficient and as understandable as possible, and a variety of standards for 

protecting homeowners, such as prohibitions on “dual tracking” –

simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification while proceeding 

to foreclose. Going forward, Treasury hopes these assessments will also set 

the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist 

homeowners.

Below are general descriptions of the data, the evaluation process, and the 

consequences for servicers needing improvement.

(Continued on next page)

19
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

The Performance Data: Compliance and Program Results

Freddie Mac, acting as Treasury’s compliance agent for MHA, has created a 

separate division known as Making Home Affordable–Compliance (MHA-C) to 

evaluate servicer performance through reviews of program compliance. MHAC tests and evaluates a range of servicer activities for compliance with MHA 

guidelines. Once MHA-C’s reviews are complete, MHA-C shares its results with 

the servicers and identifies areas that need remediation. Each compliance 

activity tested falls into one of three overall compliance categories – Identifying 

and Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and 

Program Management, Reporting and Governance. The compliance results 

shared with the servicers are then used to generate the servicer assessments. 

The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested by MHA-C 

that had significant impact on homeowners and include for those highlighted 

activities a one-star, two-star, or three-star rating for the most recent 

evaluations. One star means the servicer did not meet Treasury’s benchmark 

required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs substantial 

improvement in its performance of that activity. Two stars mean the servicer 

did not meet Treasury’s benchmark required for that particular activity, and the 

servicer needs moderate improvement in its performance of that activity. 

Three stars mean the servicer met Treasury’s benchmark required for that 

particular activity, but the servicer may nonetheless need minor improvement 

in its performance of that activity.

Although the compliance reviews emphasize objective measurements and 

observed facts, compliance reviews still involve a certain level of judgment. 

Compliance reviews are also retrospective in nature – looking backward, not 

forward, which means that activities identified as needing improvement in a 

given quarter may already be under remediation by the servicer. In addition, 

not every compliance activity is evaluated every quarter, which means that a 

rating from one quarter might carry forward to the subsequent quarter’s 

assessment if that activity was not retested in that subsequent quarter. Finally, 

the compliance reviews use “sampling” as a testing methodology. Sampling, an 

industry-accepted auditing technique, looks at a subset of a particular 

population of activity transactions, rather than the entirety of the population of 

activity transactions, to extrapolate a servicer’s overall performance in that 

particular activity. 

In addition to the ratings for compliance data, the assessments also include 

program results metrics. Fannie Mae, acting as Treasury’s program 

administrator for MHA, collects servicer data used to measure program results. 

These metrics are key indicators of how timely and effectively servicers assist 

eligible homeowners under MHA guidelines and report program data. 

Although the servicers are not given an overall rating for this data, the results 

metrics nonetheless compare a servicer’s performance for a given quarter 

against the “best” and “worst” performing servicer of the largest servicers 

participating in the program. The results metrics provide a snapshot of how 

each of those servicers compares in specific areas under MHA. 

The Determination Process: Results of the Data

Treasury reviews the compliance data and ratings, the program results metrics, 

and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not 

limited to, a servicer’s progress in implementing previously identified 

improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial 

improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its 

performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the 

significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments, 

Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 21 summarizes the 

overall level of improvement needed for each servicer. 

Consequences for Servicers

For servicers in need of substantial improvement, Treasury will, absent 

extenuating circumstances, withhold financial incentives owed to those 

servicers until they make certain identified improvements. In certain cases, 

particularly where there is a failure to correct identified problems within a 

reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently reduce the financial 

incentives. Servicers in need of moderate improvement may be subject to 

withholding in the future if they fail to make certain identified improvements. 

All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their 

participation in MHA; these withholdings do not apply to incentives paid to 

servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors. 

Additional Information

See the “Metrics Description” on page 44 for a description of each of the 

compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more 

information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov. 20
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

1st Quarter 2013 Servicer Assessment Results

The following table details the results of the Servicer Assessments, based on compliance and program results:

Improvement Needed Servicer Name

Substantial

Moderate

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Homeward Residential, Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Minor

Bank of America, N.A.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

OneWest Bank

Select Portfolio Servicing

21

For the first quarter of 2013, Bank of America, N.A, GMAC Mortgage, OneWest Bank and Select Portfolio Servicing were determined to need minor improvement 

in their performance under MHA guidelines.

CitiMortgage, Inc. and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC were determined to need moderate improvement and their compliance results for the first quarter approached 

the level required for a determination of minor improvement. 

Homeward Residential, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. were also found to need moderate improvement.

Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the First Quarter 2013 servicer assessment results.
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

22

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 1st Quarter 2011-1st Quarter 2013

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12 1Q13

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West

Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average

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

benchmark is that the second look % disagree must be less than 4%. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury covered the 

first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the first published assessments through the most recent assessment.

Benchmark: 4%

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

Overview

23

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 1st Quarter 2011-1st Quarter 2013

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12 1Q13

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West

Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average

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

Treasury’s benchmark is that the second look % unable to determine must be less than 10%. The first servicer assessment results published by 

Treasury covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the first published assessments through the most 

recent assessment.

Benchmark: 10%

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

Overview

24

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 1st Quarter 2011-1st Quarter 2013

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12 1Q13

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West

Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average

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

benchmark is that the income calculation error % must be less than 5%. Correctly calculating homeowner monthly income is a critical component of 

evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an accurate modification payment. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury 

covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the first published assessments through the most recent 

assessment.

Benchmark: 5%

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

Overview

Second Look % Disagree1 Second Look % Unable to Determine2 Income Calculation Error Rate3

Servicer 

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q2 

2012

Q3 

2012

Q4 

2012

Q1 

2013

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q2 

2012

Q3 

2012

Q4 

2012

Q1 

2013

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q2 

2012

Q3 

2012

Q4 

2012

Q1 

2013

Bank of America, 

N.A. 1.5% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.2% 1.3% 0.0% 18.8% 8.2% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0% 6.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0% 1.0% 3.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc. 2.0% 0.5% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 6.7% 1.3% 13.3% 5.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 3.8% 6.0% 4.7% 10.0% 12.0% 6.0% 3.0% 4.0% 1.0% 3.1% 0.0% 1.0%

GMAC Mortgage, 

LLC 4.7% 1.7% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.3% 2.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 6.0% 4.2% 4.2% 6.5% 4.0% 6.0% 10.0% 4.0% 2.0%

Homeward 

Residential, Inc. 1.0% 0.7% 0.0% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.5% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 14.0% 5.3% 2.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 4.0% 7.0% 2.0%

JPMorgan Chase 

Bank, N.A. 1.6% 1.2% 0.0% 0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7% 1.4% 3.8% 3.1% 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0%

Litton Loan 

Servicing, LP4 3.7% 3.3% 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.3% 2.7% 2.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.0% 2.0% 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Ocwen Loan 

Servicing, LLC 6.7% 2.7% 0.0% 0.7% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 10.3% 3.0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 33.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0%

OneWest Bank 6.7% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 11.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0%

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2.0% 1.3% 2.3% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 15.0% 10.0% 3.2% 1.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 0.0%

Wells Fargo Bank, 

N.A. 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 1.0% 1.3% 3.0% 1.3% 6.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 1.0% 0.5% 0.3% 27.0% 4.4% 5.5% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.5% 1.0%

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

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

determination.

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

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

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

25
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

26

Bank of America, N.A.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 3.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.4% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  Bank of America, N.A. has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

27

Bank of America, N.A.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

43.0%

2.7%

40.5%

40.5%

1.0%

35.7%

35.7%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

85.5%

92.4%

82.0%

84.5%

91.5%

79.9%

83.0%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

24

7

31

24

7

32

24

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

3.6%

0.0%

2.7%

2.2%

0.0%

22.8%

1.2%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

28

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.3% 



< 10% 4.7% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.5% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed  After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

29

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials1

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

43.3%

2.7%

40.5%

25.5%

1.0%

35.7%

26.6%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

87.3%

92.4%

82.0%

86.8%

91.5%

79.9%

86.5%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

23

7

31

23

7

32

24

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

0.4%

0.0%

2.7%

0.7%

0.0%

22.8%

0.5%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1 Per program guidance, CitiMortgage Inc. recently began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with reboarding of some of these modifications in subsequent months. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, these modifications are reported as Active Trials. Many of these loans are six months or more beyond 

their first trial payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trial. Fluctuations over the next few reporting cycles are expected in this population for all servicers as they complete the re-boarding process.

CitiMortgage, Inc.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

30

GMAC Mortgage, LLC1

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

next quarterly assessment report.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.4% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

31

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

2.7%

2.7%

40.5%

1.0%

1.0%

35.7%

2.1%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

87.7%

92.4%

82.0%

85.1%

91.5%

79.9%

85.5%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

13

7

31

13

7

32

13

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

0.0%

0.0%

2.7%

0.8%

0.0%

22.8%

0.0%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in 

the next quarterly assessment report.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC1
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

32

Homeward Residential, Inc.1

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

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 1.3% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.3% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  Homeward Residential, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed  After considering all relevant factors, Homeward Residential, Inc. servicer incentives will 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

33

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

34.7%

2.7%

40.5%

12.2%

1.0%

35.7%

10.1%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

92.4%

92.4%

82.0%

89.2%

91.5%

79.9%

89.4%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

28

7

31

29

7

32

29

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

3.9%

0.0%

2.7%

0.4%

0.0%

22.8%

0.8%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 20132

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1 Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward Residential, Inc. was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in the next quarterly assessment 

report. 

2 The metrics for March 2013 reflect the result of the transfer of the majority of the loans in the HAMP system of record from Homeward Residential to Ocwen Loan Servicing. 

Homeward Residential, Inc.1
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

34

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.2% 



< 10% 3.1% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.4% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed  After considering all relevant factors, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

35

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

10.1%

2.7%

40.5%

6.3%

1.0%

35.7%

5.2%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

89.5%

92.4%

82.0%

88.6%

91.5%

79.9%

87.7%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

31

7

31

31

7

32

32

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

1.4%

0.0%

2.7%

0.6%

0.0%

22.8%

0.2%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 

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

Compliance Results

36

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.7% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.0% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed  After considering all relevant factors, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC servicer incentives will 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

37

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

14.6%

2.7%

40.5%

11.9%

1.0%

35.7%

12.3%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

80.6%

92.4%

82.0%

82.0%

91.5%

79.9%

79.9%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

10

7

31

10

7

32

9

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

0.7%

0.0%

2.7%

1.0%

0.0%

22.8%

1.0%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

38

OneWest Bank

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.0% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

39

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

5.1%

2.7%

40.5%

9.3%

1.0%

35.7%

6.7%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

92.0%

92.4%

82.0%

91.5%

91.5%

79.9%

90.3%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

13

7

31

14

7

32

14

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

0.0%

0.0%

2.7%

0.0%

0.0%

22.8%

0.0%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 

OneWest Bank
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

40

Select Portfolio Servicing

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.3% 



< 10% 0.7% 



 - 



< 5% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.0% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

41

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

15.0%

2.7%

40.5%

27.4%

1.0%

35.7%

16.1%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

82.0%

92.4%

82.0%

82.2%

91.5%

79.9%

82.9%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

7

7

31

7

7

32

6

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

0.0%

0.0%

2.7%

1.9%

0.0%

22.8%

22.8%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 20121

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Select Portfolio Servicing

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1Select Portfolio Servicing received transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the September 2012 reporting period increased as the 

result of approximately 5,540 transferred loans. In addition, the transfer of loans resulted in a decrease in the conversion rate and an increase in the aged trials as a percentage of active trials.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

42

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.3% 



< 10% 0.3% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed  After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time.

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2013

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from 

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on 

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

43

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials 1

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

43.3%

26.4%

2.7%

40.5%

13.8%

1.0%

35.7%

11.0%

2.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

80.6%

88.7%

92.4%

82.0%

88.7%

91.5%

79.9%

89.3%

90.3%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

31

25

7

31

25

7

32

25

6

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.9%

0.3%

0.0%

2.7%

2.7%

0.0%

22.8%

0.1%

0.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2012

 Dec. 2012

 Mar. 2013

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1 Per program guidance, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. recently began processing GSE loan repurchase activity. This process requires reverting the impacted permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP system of record with reboarding of some of these modifications in subsequent months. Prior to being re-boarded as permanent modifications, these modifications are reported as Active Trials. Many of these loans are six months or more beyond 

their first trial payment due date resulting in their classification as an Aged Trial. Fluctuations over the next few reporting cycles are expected in this population for all servicers as they complete the re-boarding process.
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Appendix

Metrics Descriptions

Compliance Metrics (quantitative)

Second Look % Disagree: Second Look is a process in 

which MHA-C reviews loans not in a permanent 

modification, to assess the accuracy of the servicer’s 

determination of whether the homeowner is eligible for 

a modification. This metric measures the percentage of 

loans reviewed in Second Look with which MHA-C 

disagrees with a servicer’s determination. 

Second Look % Unable to Determine: This metric 

measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second 

Look for which MHA-C is not able to determine, based 

on the documentation provided, how the servicer 

reached its loan-modification decision. 

For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to Determine 

results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to 

take include, but are not limited to: reevaluating loans 

not offered HAMP modifications, submitting additional 

documentation to support the initial reason for denial of 

the modification, clarifying loan status, and engaging in 

systemic process remediation. For such results, servicers 

are also reminded of their obligation to suspend 

foreclosure of the loan until the unresolved items are 

remediated. 

Income Calculation Errors: Correctly calculating 

homeowner 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 borrower’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up 

to a 5% differential from MHA-C’s calculations. For 

Income Calculation Error results, remedial actions 

Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not 

limited to: correcting income errors exceeding the 5% 

differential, requiring the servicer to review their own 

income calculation accuracy, enhancing policies and 

procedures, and conducting staff training on income 

calculation.

Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury pays incentives 

to servicers, investors, and homeowners for permanent 

modifications completed under MHA. Although 

intended for different recipients, all incentives are paid 

through the servicer. Data that servicers upload to the 

program system of record is used to calculate the 

incentives paid 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. 

Compliance Metrics (qualitative)

Servicers establish processes and internal controls to 

help ensure their compliance with Program guidance. 

For each of the performance categories, Treasury 

performs a qualitative assessment of those internal 

controls based on MHA-C’s compliance reviews. That 

assessment evaluates the nature, scope, and potential or 

actual impact on homeowners resulting from instances 

of servicer non-compliance with its own internal 

controls. For ineffective internal controls, remedial 

actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but 

are not limited to: identifying and reevaluating any 

affected loans, enhancing the effectiveness of internal 

controls, and conducting staff training on servicer 

procedures. 

Program Metrics

Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the rate 

of conversion to permanent modification for trials 

started on or after June 1, 2010, when all servicers were 

required to verify income documentation at trial start. 

Conversion rate is measured against all trials eligible to 

convert – those three months in trial, or four months if 

the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial 

modification start. 

Permanent modifications transferred among servicers 

are credited to the originating servicer. However, trial 

modifications transferred are reflected in the current 

servicer's population. A servicer's conversion rate can be 

negatively impacted by the transfer of trial 

modifications.

Aged Trials as % of Active Trials: This monthly metric 

measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share of 

all active trials. These figures include trial modifications 

that have been converted to permanent modifications 

by the servicer and are pending reporting to the program 

system of record, plus some portion which may be 

canceled. 

Days to Resolve Escalated Cases: This cumulative metric 

measures servicer response time for homeowner 

inquiries escalated to MHA Support Centers. Effective 

Feb. 1, 2011, a target of 30 calendar days was 

established for non-GSE escalation cases, including an 

estimated 5 days processing by the MHA Support 

Centers. The methodology for calculating average days 

to respond to escalated cases was updated to only 

include non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011. 

The figures exclude investor denial cases escalated prior 

to 11/1/2011. Cases involving bankruptcy and those 

that did not require servicer actions are not included in 

the calculation of servicer time to resolve escalations.

% of Missing Modification Status Reports: This monthly 

metric measures the servicer’s ability to promptly report 

on modification status. Inconsistent and untimely 

reporting of modification status reports may impact 

incentive compensation and loan performance analysis.

Treasury revised its Federally Declared Disaster (FDD) 

guidance, allowing servicers to suspend OMR reporting 

for loans where the homeowner was impacted by 

Hurricane Sandy or any other FDD. This guidance may 

impact missing OMR reporting.

For more information on the assessments, please visit: 

www.FinancialStability.gov. 44
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Servicers participating in the HAMP First Lien Modification Program may also offer additional support for homeowners, including Home Affordable Foreclosure 

Alternatives (HAFA), a forbearance for unemployed borrowers through the Unemployment Program (UP), and Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA). 

Effective October 3, 2010, the ability to make new financial commitments under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) terminated, and consequently no 

new Servicer Participation Agreements may be executed. In addition, effective June 25, 2010, no new housing programs may be created under TARP. 

Allstate Mortgage Loans & 

Investments, Inc.

AMS Servicing, LLC

Aurora Loan Services, LLC

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bank United

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC

Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC

CCO Mortgage

Central Florida Educators Federal 

Credit Union

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Citizens 1st National Bank

Community Bank & Trust Company

CUC Mortgage Corporation

DuPage Credit Union

Fay Servicing, LLC

Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank

First Bank

First Financial Bank, N.A.

Franklin Credit Management 

Corporation

Franklin Savings

Glass City Federal Credit Union

GMAC Mortgage, LLC2

Great Lakes Credit Union

Greater Nevada Mortgage Services

Green Tree Servicing LLC

Hartford Savings Bank

Hillsdale County National Bank

HomEq Servicing

Horicon Bank

IC Federal Credit Union

Idaho Housing and Finance Association

iServe Residential Lending LLC

iServe Servicing Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3

Lake City Bank

Liberty Bank and Trust Co. 

Los Alamos National Bank

Magna Bank

Marix Servicing, LLC

Midland Mortgage Company

Midwest Community Bank

Mission Federal Credit Union

Mortgage Center, LLC

Nationstar Mortgage, LLC

Navy Federal Credit Union

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC4

OneWest Bank

ORNL Federal Credit Union

Pathfinder Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage5

Purdue Employees Federal Credit 

Union

QLending, Inc.

Quantum Servicing Corporation

Residential Credit Solutions

RG Mortgage Corporation

RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing 

Corporation

Schools Financial Credit Union

Select Portfolio Servicing

Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial 

Services, Inc.

Silver State Schools Credit Union

Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC

Sterling Savings Bank

Technology Credit Union

The Golden 1 Credit Union

U.S. Bank National Association

United Bank

United Bank Mortgage Corporation

Vantium Capital, Inc.

Vist Financial Corp.

Wealthbridge Mortgage Corp. 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.6

Yadkin Valley Bank

1 Bank of America, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, 

Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen

Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in future reports. 3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation. 

4 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. Effective December 27, 2012, Homeward 

Residential, Inc. was acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition is reflected 

in this report, except for the servicer assessment portion. 5 Formerly National City Bank.

6 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. 

Appendix A1: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP

45
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2013

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC2

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3

Nationstar Mortgage LLC

OneWest Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage 4

Residential Credit Solutions 

Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc. 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5

FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP)

Amarillo National Bank

American Financial Resources Inc. 

Aurora Financial Group, Inc. 

Aurora Loan Services, LLC 

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico 

Bank of America, N.A.1

Capital International Financial, Inc. 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

CU Mortgage Services, Inc. 

First Federal Bank of Florida 

First Mortgage Corporation 

Franklin Savings 

Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC2

Green Tree Servicing, LLC 

Guaranty Bank 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

James B. Nutter & Company 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 3

M&T Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Marsh Associates, Inc. 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage ,LLC 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC6

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC 

PNC Mortgage4

Residential Credit Solutions 

Schmidt Mortgage Company 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc. 

Stockman Bank of Montana 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5

Weststar Mortgage, Inc. 

FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP)

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC2

Green Tree Servicing, LLC

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

PNC Bank, National Association 

PNC Mortgage 4

Residential Credit Solutions 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5

Rural Housing Service Modification Program 

(RD-HAMP)

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico

Bank of America, N.A.1

Horicon Bank 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3

Magna Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.5

1 Bank of America, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 Effective February 15, 2013, portions of the assets of GMAC Mortgage, LLC. were acquired by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The impact of this acquisition will be reflected in future 

reports.

3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation. 4 Formerly National City Bank. 5 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage FSB. 6 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs

46