Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

Report Highlights

More Than 1.8 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through Making Home 

Affordable

• More than 1.2 million homeowners have received a permanent modification through the Home Affordable 

Modification Program (HAMP). Homeowners have reduced their first lien mortgage payments by a median 

of approximately $547 each month – almost 40% of their median before-modification payment – saving a 

total estimated $23.5 billion to date in monthly mortgage payments. 

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

been granted an estimated $12.4 billion in principal reduction. Of all non Government Sponsored 

Enterprise (GSE) loans eligible for principal reduction entering HAMP in October, 69% included a principal 

reduction feature.

• Nearly 238,000 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).

• More than 121,000 second lien modifications have been completed through the Second Lien Modification 

Program (2MP). 

This Month: Q3 2013 Changes to Quarterly Servicer Assessment 

• For the third quarter of 2013, the content of the Servicer Assessment has changed from previously 

published versions. The Servicer Assessment has been a valuable tool to report on servicer performance, 

as well as drive performance improvements. The Assessment has been enhanced to present new 

compliance metrics and related benchmarks. These changes will provide additional insight into the 

impact of servicer performance on the borrower’s experience, allow for trending analysis of all 

compliance metrics and foster further improvement in servicer performance by tightening performance 

benchmarks. 

• The changes include:

 tightening the performance benchmarks for existing compliance metrics, in addition to 

expanding the coverage of certain existing metrics; 

 adding three new compliance metrics, such as servicer compliance with timely assignment of a 

single point of contact and;

 removing three existing compliance metrics.

• For the third quarter of 2013, three servicers were found to need minor improvement, three servicers 

were found to need moderate improvement and one servicer was found to need substantial 

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

program reviews. Although this quarter’s results indicate one servicer needs substantial improvement, 

on average, servicer performance has improved since the inception of the Servicer Assessment reports. 

This is evidenced by an average income calculation error rate of 0.8% for this quarter.

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.

APPENDICES:

Terms and Methodology

Program Notes

End Notes

Participants in MHA Programs

SUMMARY AND PROGRAM RESULTS:

Making Home Affordable Program Activity

HAMP Modification Activity

Activity for HAFA, 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP 

and UP

Principal Reduction Activity

HAMP Modification Characteristics 

HAMP Activity by State and MSA

Homeowner Outreach

SERVICER RESULTS:

HAMP, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity

HAMP Modification Activity

Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners

Average Delinquency at Trial Start

Conversion Rate

Disposition of Homeowners Not in 

HAMP

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:

Overview

Servicer Results

Description of Metrics

 

2

3

4

5-6

7

8

9

 

10

11

12

13

14

15

 

16-17

18-28

29

Inside:

 30

31

32

33-34
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 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 an eligible first lien 

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. A short sale requires a third-party 

purchaser and cooperation of junior lienholders and 

mortgage insurers to complete the transaction.

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. GSE Standard Modification and GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

In total, the MHA program has completed more than 1.8 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 

Started* 1,468,940 24,557

2MP Modifications Started 121,252 1,327

HAFA Transactions Completed 237,687 11,252

UP Forbearance Plans Started (through 

September 2013) 36,535 806

Cumulative Activity1 1,864,414 37,942

MHA Program Activity

1,299 1,324

1,434 1,475 1,515 1,550 1,588 1,624 1,665 1,703 1,740

1,791 1,826 1,864

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

Sep

2012

Oct Nov Dec Jan

2013

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct

Cumulative MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative Transactions Completed

*Program-to-Date Total Includes :

• 1,285,018 GSE and Non-GSE HAMP permanent modifications

• 20,793 FHA- and RD-HAMP modifications

• 163,129 GSE Standard Modifications since October 2011 under the GSEs’ Servicer 

Alignment Initiative

See Appendix for Terms and Methodology, Program Notes, End Notes and additional 

information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs. 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 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, 13,655 trials 

have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; 10,676 were trials with a first payment recorded in 

October 2013. 

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

1,026 1,043 1,060 1,077 1,091 1,107 1,122 1,136 1,151 1,167 1,179 1,191 1,206 1,223 1,237 1,256 1,269 1,285

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

1,300

1,400

May

2012

June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2013

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct

All Permanent Modifications Started 

(000s)

1,861

1,879 1,894

1,912

1,926

1,944

1,960

1,974 1,986

2,001

2,018

2,036

2,055

2,071

2,086

2,100 2,112 2,123

0

50

100

1,700

1,750

1,800

1,850

1,900

1,950

2,000

2,050

2,100

2,150

May

2012

June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2013

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct

New Trials Started (000s)

All Trials Started (000s)

HAMP Activity Through October 2013 Total

Trial

Modifications

All Trials Started 2,122,785

 Tier 1 2,080,002

 Tier 2 42,783

Trials Reported Since Last Report2 13,655

Active Trials 56,969

Trial Modifications Cancelled since Verified Income 

Requirement* 75,763

Permanent Modifications

All Permanent Modifications Started 1,285,018

 Tier 1 1,259,344

 Tier 2 25,674

Permanent Modifications Reported Since Last Report 16,383

Permanent Modifications Disqualified (Cumulative)** 345,925

Active Permanent Modifications 917,138

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 limit 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 

3.1 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). 

* When Treasury first launched HAMP in the spring of 2009, servicers were not required to verify a borrower’s 

income prior to commencing a trial modification. This was the policy because of the severity of the crisis, the 

number of homeowners already in default, and the fact that servicers had not yet built the systems to fully 

implement the program. However, this resulted in many trials being cancelled once income was verified. 

Treasury required all servicers to verify a borrower’s income as of June 10, 2010, which substantially lowered trial 

cancelations. Prior to that date, 705,035 trials were cancelled, for a cumulative of 780,798. ** Does not include 21,955 loans paid off.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 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 36,535

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 31,071

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 5,464

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

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

mortgages.

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started 35,753

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 20,688

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. Effective September 2013, Treasury expanded the 2MP program eligibility to 

include second liens with a qualifying first lien modified under the GSE's Standard Modification 

program. 

2MP modifications and partial extinguishments require that the qualifying first lien 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) 121,252

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 31,119

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified* 9,027

Active Second Lien Modifications** 77,713

Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments 9,507

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Median Amount of Full Extinguishment $61,242 

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second Lien 

Modifications $10,116 

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity

Non-GSE Activity GSE Activity Total

Short Sale 134,601 87,285 221,886

Deed-in-Lieu 4,173 11,628 15,801

Total Transactions Completed 138,774 98,913 237,687

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 deedin-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.

* Does not include 3,393 loans paid off. 

** Includes 7,006 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.
Making Home Affordable: Program Results

Program Performance Report Through October 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 servicers and 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.

*Because the first step of the standard HAMP waterfall includes the capitalization of accrued interest, 

out-of-pocket 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-to-value ratio can increase in the modification process.

All HAMP 

Modifications

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 Total Active, Percent of Total Activity: 

- California 26% 33%

- Florida 12% 15%

- Illinois 5% 5%

Top Three States’ Percent of Total 43% 54%

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

- Before Modification 119% 149%

- After Modification* 115% 115%

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

- Front-End DTI 45.4% 45.3%

- Back-End DTI 68.9% 58.5%

HAMP 

Modifications 

with Earned 

Principal 

Reduction Under 

PRA3

HAMP 

Modifications 

with Upfront 

Principal 

Reduction 

Outside of PRA

Total HAMP 

Modifications 

with Principal 

Reduction

All Trial Modifications Started 153,537 48,458 201,995

Trials Reported Since Last Report 3,005 857 3,862

Active Trial Modifications 13,778 3,446 17,224

All Permanent Modifications Started 127,776 41,450 169,226

Permanent Modifications Reported Since 

Last Report 3,683 976 4,659

Active Permanent Modifications 107,401 35,385 142,786

Median Principal Amount Reduced for 

Active Permanent Modifications4 $72,485 $57,027 $67,524 

Median Principal Amount Reduced for 

Active Permanent Modifications (%)5 32.2% 18.0% 30.1%

Total Outstanding Principal Balance 

Reduced on Active Permanent 

Modifications4

$9,941,542,691 $2,451,075,739 $12,392,618,430 
Making Home Affordable: Program Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

6

HAMP Principal Reduction

28%

35%

42%

46% 45% 45% 45%

56%

59% 60% 60% 61% 61%

54% 54% 55%

52%

55%

57%

61% 61% 61% 61%

56% 55% 54% 55% 56% 58%

61%

63% 63%

59%

57%

36%

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

56%

59% 60% 60% 62% 63%

67% 65%

69% 71%

73%

76%

80%

77% 78% 78%

72%

70% 70% 69%

67% 68%

71% 72%

74%

71%

69%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

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 May June July Aug Sep Oct

Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible Loans 

PRA All Principal Reduction*

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, has resulted in servicers granting more non-PRA principal reductions. Of non-GSE loans 

eligible for principal reduction that started a trial in October 2013, 69% included a principal reduction feature. 57% 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. 

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

HAMP 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 $23.5 billion, program to 

date, compared with unmodified mortgage obligations. The median monthly savings for homeowners in active permanent first lien modifications is $546.65, 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, 7% 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 Ratio

 Tier 1 45.6% 31.0% -15.1 pct pts

 Tier 2 30.2% 25.0% -7.1 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio

 Tier 1 69.5% 51.1% -15.4 pct pts

 Tier 2 46.2% 37.9% -7.1 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing 

Payment

 Tier 1 $1,414.72 $795.33 ($553.33)

 Tier 2 $1,142.97 $749.66 ($357.44)

Modification Steps of Active Permanent Modifications

Modification Step Tier 1 Tier 2

Interest Rate Reduction 96.2% 79.3%

Term Extension 63.2% 72.4%

Principal Forbearance 33.7% 28.0%

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent modifications 

are:

 68.4% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or unemployment)

 10.3% 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.

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

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

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

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

homeowner’s post modification DTI falling within an allowable target range.6 

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:

 25% were previously in a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification.

 17% were previously evaluated for Tier 1 and did not meet eligibility 

requirements.

• The median gross monthly income of homeowners in the program is $3,855.18. 

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

8

State

Active 

Trials

Active

Permanent 

Modifications

State 

Total

Active

% of U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity State

Active 

Trials

Active 

Permanent 

Modifications

State 

Total

Active

% of U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

AK 30 411 441 0.0% MT 66 1,045 1,111 0.1%

AL 486 4,984 5,470 0.6% NC 1,287 16,277 17,564 1.8%

AR 178 1,916 2,094 0.2% ND 9 138 147 0.0%

AZ 989 34,100 35,089 3.6% NE 103 1,197 1,300 0.1%

CA 10,171 238,971 249,142 25.6% NH 237 3,983 4,220 0.4%

CO 684 12,878 13,562 1.4% NJ 2,391 29,467 31,858 3.3%

CT 1,007 11,857 12,864 1.3% NM 235 3,119 3,354 0.3%

DC 96 1,593 1,689 0.2% NV 944 19,432 20,376 2.1%

DE 210 2,696 2,906 0.3% NY 4,134 47,107 51,241 5.3%

FL 7,377 112,264 119,641 12.3% OH 1,584 18,955 20,539 2.1%

GA 1,882 32,410 34,292 3.5% OK 225 2,150 2,375 0.2%

HI 218 3,593 3,811 0.4% OR 514 10,336 10,850 1.1%

IA 179 2,098 2,277 0.2% PA 2,005 19,080 21,085 2.2%

ID 171 3,371 3,542 0.4% RI 320 4,339 4,659 0.5%

IL 2,993 46,997 49,990 5.1% SC 677 8,299 8,976 0.9%

IN 775 8,450 9,225 0.9% SD 15 303 318 0.0%

KS 168 2,133 2,301 0.2% TN 906 9,029 9,935 1.0%

KY 342 3,336 3,678 0.4% TX 2,333 25,220 27,553 2.8%

LA 502 5,101 5,603 0.6% UT 304 7,921 8,225 0.8%

MA 1,667 21,707 23,374 2.4% VA 1,261 21,649 22,910 2.4%

MD 2,009 28,873 30,882 3.2% VT 76 806 882 0.1%

ME 218 2,520 2,738 0.3% WA 1,205 19,580 20,785 2.1%

MI 1,207 26,419 27,626 2.8% WI 696 8,413 9,109 0.9%

MN 641 13,903 14,544 1.5% WV 83 1,186 1,269 0.1%

MO 708 8,784 9,492 1.0% WY 31 413 444 0.0%

MS 279 3,111 3,390 0.3% Other* 141 3,218 3,359 0.3%

HAMP Activity by State

* Other includes Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Active 

Trials

Active 

Permanent

Mods

MSA Total 

Active

% of U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

Median $ 

Payment 

Reduction 7

Median % 

Payment 

Reduction 7

Los Angeles-Long BeachSanta Ana, CA 3,577 77,402 80,979 8.3% $869.35 41%

New York-Northern New 

Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 5,014 62,049 67,063 6.9% $889.70 43%

Miami-Fort LauderdalePompano Beach, FL 3,352 49,984 53,336 5.5% $582.70 46%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, ILIN-WI 2,894 45,664 48,558 5.0% $569.94 44%

Riverside-San BernardinoOntario, CA 1,703 45,140 46,843 4.8% $690.06 41%

Washington-ArlingtonAlexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 1,669 30,516 32,185 3.3% $699.51 39%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 670 27,041 27,711 2.8% $503.48 41%

Atlanta-Sandy SpringsMarietta, GA 1,407 26,112 27,519 2.8% $414.09 40%

San Francisco-OaklandFremont, CA 884 21,549 22,433 2.3% $928.19 40%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San 

Marcos, CA 711 17,485 18,196 1.9% $810.29 39%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, 

FL 901 16,104 17,005 1.7% $495.45 42%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, 

MA-NH 1,136 15,609 16,745 1.7% $686.96 39%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 780 15,807 16,587 1.7% $573.42 42%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 643 15,829 16,472 1.7% $423.38 42%

Philadelphia-CamdenWilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 1,388 14,599 15,987 1.6% $450.49 36%

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

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

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/results/MHA-Reports/
Making Home Affordable: Program Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

9

Reaching Out to Homeowners

See page 8 for additional detail of activity by state and metropolitan statistical area.

89 Treasury-sponsored 

Outreach Events, through 

October 2013, covering 57

cities, giving nearly 76,000

homeowners the opportunity 

to meet face-to-face with their 

mortgage company and HUDapproved housing counselors. 

In addition, Treasury has 

partnered with the Ad Council 

on three different public service 

advertising campaigns featured 

in both English and Spanish, 

encouraging struggling 

homeowners nationwide to 

reach out for help with their 

mortgage.

OVER 

9.7

MILLION

OVER 

4

MILLION

OVER

180 

MILLION

OVER

2.2

MILLION

Homeowners 

referred to free 

housing counseling 

from a “HUDapproved” housing 

expert.

Page views on 

MakingHome

Affordable.gov.

Calls taken 

at the 

Homeowner’s 

HOPE Hotline.

Solicitations of 

homeowners 

by participating 

mortgage 

servicers.

1

Number of Homeowner Events per State

2 3 or more

Total HAMP Modifications Active

5,000 and lower

5,001-10,000

10,000-20,000

20,001-30,000

30,001 and higher

5

3

3

3 4

3

3

16

14

6

6
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

10

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer

HAMP First Lien Modifications Principal Reduction Alternative 

(PRA)9

Second Lien 

Modification (2MP)

Home Affordable 

Foreclosure 

Alternatives (HAFA)10

Servicer Trials

Started8

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started8

Trials 

Started

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started

Second Lien 

Modifications 

Started

Non-GSE Transactions 

Completed

Bank of America, N.A. 250,278 114,531 9,920 8,337 35,285 43,212

CitiMortgage, Inc. 138,708 67,470 3,820 2,908 14,584 1,029

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 321,486 191,384 28,836 25,832 34,803 34,857

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 180,805 119,367 5,882 5,496 2,377 4,782

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 336,184 236,828 55,558 43,666 N/A 12,960

OneWest Bank 43,848 28,527 7,934 7,009 3,782 5,632

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. 94,607 54,693 6,037 4,500 N/A 5,628

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 307,156 182,431 28,935 24,639 18,422 24,087

Other Servicers 449,713 289,787 6,615 5,389 11,999 6,587

Total 2,122,785 1,285,018 153,537 127,776 121,252 138,774

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

See Appendix for Terms and Methodology, Program Notes, End Notes and additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs. 
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

Servicer 

Trial Plan 

Offers 

Extended11 

All HAMP 

Trials 

Started8

HAMP 

Permanent 

Modifications

Started8

Active Trial 

Modifications12

Active Trial 

Modifications 

Lasting 6 

Months or 

Longer12

Active 

Permanent 

Modifications

Total Active Modifications

GSE Private Portfolio Total

Bank of America, N.A. 583,781 250,278 114,531 4,653 1,215 77,869 24,687 41,904 15,931 82,522

CitiMortgage, Inc. 222,827 138,708 67,470 3,020 985 49,576 32,438 6,053 14,105 52,596

JPMorgan Chase Bank, 

N.A. 436,026 321,486 191,384 4,941 904 145,493 66,896 52,825 30,713 150,434

Nationstar Mortgage 

LLC 74,325 180,805 119,367 5,332 1,221 87,652 57,165 33,789 2,030 92,984

Ocwen Loan Servicing, 

LLC 296,742 336,184 236,828 13,788 1,321 162,093 38,955 120,483 16,443 175,881

OneWest Bank* 102,032 43,848 28,527 1,192 72 21,488 0 19,717 2,963 22,680

Select Portfolio 

Servicing, Inc. 88,652 94,607 54,693 5,276 1,562 31,382 457 32,030 4,171 36,658

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 278,429 307,156 182,431 8,508 777 137,156 55,736 28,637 61,291 145,664

Other Servicers 273,125 449,713 289,787 10,259 2,001 204,429 170,176 17,779 26,733 214,688

Total 2,355,939 2,122,785 1,285,018 56,969 10,058 917,138 446,510 353,217 174,380 974,107

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer and Investor Type

11

*OneWest Bank recently sold mortgage servicing rights to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The transfer is expected to occur in stages during the second half of 2013. Therefore, Ocwen

Loan Servicing, LLC includes a portion of the loans previously reported under OneWest Bank. 
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

12

Servicer Outreach to HAMP Eligible 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, October 2012 – September 2013

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

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% 80% 77%

64%

70%

86%

65% 67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

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

69%

Right Party Contact Ratio HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio

82%

93%

88% 88%

96%

89%

83%

Source: Survey of largest participating servicers as of September 30, 2013. 
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

HAMP Average Homeowner Delinquency at Trial Start

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Bank of

America

CitiMortgage JPMorgan

Chase

Nationstar Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Days Delinquent

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 October 1, 2011, 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 October 2013

90%

89% 91%

79%

86%

93%

74%

92%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Bank of

America

CitiMortgage JPMorgan

Chase

Nationstar Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Conversion Rate

HAMP Conversion Rate

14

Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010, all trials must be started using verified income documentation. Servicers have converted 

a majority of eligible trials to permanent modifications. 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. 

Of eligible trials started on or after June 1, 2010, 88% have converted to permanent modifications* as of October 2013.

For trials started on or after June 1, 2010 the average length of a trial is 3.5 months. 

* With another 3% pending processing or decision.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

Disposition Path of Homeowners Not in HAMP

Survey Data For Actions Completed Through September 201313 (Largest Servicers)

• HAMP guidance requires that 

servicers evaluate homeowners 

with eligible loans for HAMP, 

before considering other 

foreclosure alternatives.

• For those homeowners that did 

not qualify for HAMP or did not 

successfully complete the trial 

period, 58% received an 

alternative modification or 

resolved their delinquency.

15

• 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.

• The majority of homeowners who 

disqualify from a HAMP permanent 

modification receive an alternative to 

foreclosure or resolve their 

delinquency.

• Less than a quarter of homeowners 

who have disqualified from HAMP have 

been referred to foreclosure.

Servicer 

Totals 34,163 13,496 38,608 26,817 71,819 6,498 20,597 40,103 252,101

Servicer 

Totals 446,075 235,392 723,513 204,455 513,455 104,140 80,558 411,120 2,718,708

Status of Homeowners Not Accepted 

for a HAMP Trial or Those Whose 

HAMP Trial was Cancelled

Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP 

Permanent Modification Disqualified

3% 4% 5%

29%

5% 3%

14%

2%

2% 6%

11%

2%

5%

2% 3%

3%

5%

4%

25%

19% 35%

41%

18%

30% 12% 29% 28%

23%

29%

28%

15%

51%

21% 35% 26% 30%

16%

13%

14%

5%

7%

12%

10% 11%

12% 4%

6%

4%

4%

8%

9%

12%

7%

6%

27%

19%

12% 10%

23%

13% 19% 15%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Bank of America CitiMortgage JPMorgan Chase Nationstar Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo Top Servicers

% of Trials Cancelled and Not Approved

11% 8% 11%

48%

15% 12%

21%

7%

16%

4% 14% 4%

9%

4% 6%

6%

9%

9% 6%

11%

10%

13%

10% 10%

6%

6%

9%

28%

24% 36%

9%

47%

13%

34%

47%

36%

22% 16%

18%

9%

5%

20%

10% 10% 12%

6% 11%

8%

11%

12%

18%

14%

4%

10%

20% 16% 12% 7%

21%

10%

17%

11%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Bank of America CitiMortgage JPMorgan Chase Nationstar Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo Top Servicers

% of Permanent Modifications Disqualified

Action Pending: Includes homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, trial loans that have been cancelled or permanent 

modifications that have been disqualified, but further action has yet to be taken at this time. 

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

Foreclosure 

Completions

Foreclosure 

Starts

Short Sale/

Deed in Lieu

Alternative 

Modification/

Payment Plan

Borrower 

Current/

Loan Payoff

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy in 

Process

Action Pending
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 requires participating servicers to 

take specific actions to improve their servicing processes, as needed. In June of 

2011, Treasury began publishing quarterly servicer assessments for the largest 

servicers participating in MHA to drive servicers to improve their performance. 

The assessments not only provide greater transparency to the public about 

servicer performance in the program, but also prompt servicers to correct 

identified instances of non-compliance. 

Starting with the third quarter of 2013, the servicer assessments have been 

enhanced to, among other things, present new compliance metrics and related 

benchmarks. These changes will provide additional insight into the impact of 

servicer performance on the borrower’s experience, allow for trending analysis of 

all compliance metrics and foster further improvement in servicer performance 

by tightening performance benchmarks.

The changes include:

• expanding the coverage of certain existing metrics to include other MHA 

components, such as HAMP Tier 2, and the Second Lien Modification Program;

• tightening the performance benchmark thresholds for existing metrics; and

• removing three existing metrics while adding three new metrics, such as 

servicer compliance with timely assignment of a single point of contact.

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

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

these institutions and does not have the authority to impose fines or penalties, 

Treasury can, pursuant to the contract, take certain remedial actions against 

servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such remedial actions include 

requiring servicers to correct identified instances of noncompliance, as noted 

above. In addition, Treasury can implement financial remedies such as 

withholding incentive payments owed to servicers. Such incentive payments, 

which are the only payments Treasury makes for the benefit of servicers under 

the program, include payments for every successful permanent modification 

under HAMP, and payments for completed short sale/deed-in-lieu transactions 

pursuant to HAFA. 

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

only to those servicers that have agreed to participate in MHA for mortgage loans 

that are not owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (the GSEs). 

Treasury cannot and does not perform compliance reviews of (1) mortgage loans 

or activities that fall outside of MHA, (2) GSE loans or (3) those loans insured 

through the Federal Housing Administration. For each servicer, the loans that 

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

servicing operation. 

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

for MHA. These servicer assessments have set a benchmark for providing 

detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing against 

specific metrics. But, in addition to this direct effect, MHA has had an important 

indirect effect on the market as well. MHA has established standards that have 

improved mortgage modifications across the industry, and has led to important 

changes in the way mortgage servicers assist struggling homeowners generally. 

These changes include standards for how mortgage modifications should be 

designed so that they are sustainable, standards for communications with 

homeowners so that the process is as efficient and as understandable as possible, 

and a variety of standards for protecting homeowners, such as prohibitions on 

“dual tracking” – simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification 

while proceeding to foreclose. Treasury believes these assessments will continue 

to set the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist 

homeowners. 

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

consequences for servicers needing improvement. 

(Continued on next page)

16
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. MHA-C 

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. The compliance activities 

tested fall into one of three overall compliance categories – Identifying and 

Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and Program 

Management and Reporting. 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 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, 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 assess 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 

other largest servicers participating in the program. 

The Determination Process: Results of the Data

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

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

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

improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial improvement, 

moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its overall performance under 

MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the significant factors impacting 

those decisions. Based on those assessments, Treasury may take remedial action 

against servicers. Page 18 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 29 for a description of each of the 

compliance metrics presented in the assessments. 

For more information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov.

17
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

3rd Quarter 2013 Servicer Assessment Results

The following table details the results of the Servicer Assessments:

Improvement Needed Servicer Name

Minor

Bank of America, N.A.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

OneWest Bank

Moderate

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Substantial CitiMortgage, Inc.

18

For the third quarter of 2013, Bank of America, N.A, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A and OneWest Bank were determined to need minor improvement.

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. was found to need moderate improvement, however, their compliance results approached the level required for a determination of 

minor improvement. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. were found to need moderate improvement. 

CitiMortgage, Inc. was found to need substantial improvement. After considering all relevant factors, Treasury determined that withholding servicer incentives 

was not warranted for this quarter. However, Treasury will withhold servicer incentives in the future if CitiMortgage’s performance does not improve.

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

Compliance Results

19

Bank of America, N.A.

Overview Q3 2013BOAResult Q3 2013BOARating

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 1.3% ***

9 

2.0% 0.0% ***

10 

2.0% 0.0% ***

12 

2.0% 1.0% ***

13 

5.0% 0.2% ***

22 

2.0% 0.0% ***

23 

5.0% 0.0% ***

Q3 Results

 Bank of America, N.A. has areas requiring minor improvement.

Third Quarter 2013

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

20

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Overview Q3 2013CITIResult Q3 2013CITIRating

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 0.0% ***

9 

2.0% 5.6% *

10 

2.0% 0.0% ***

12 

2.0% 0.0% ***

13 

5.0% 5.0% ***

22 

2.0% 1.7% ***

23 

5.0% 10.0% *

Q3 Results

 CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring substantial improvement.

 After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will 

 not be withheld at this time.

Third Quarter 2013

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend







Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.





 Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

21

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Overview Q3 2013JPMResult Q3 2013JPMRating

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 2.6% ***

9 

2.0% 1.0% ***

10 

2.0% 2.0% ***

12 

2.0% 0.0% ***

13 

5.0% 1.1% ***

22 

2.0% 0.1% ***

23 

5.0% 0.0% ***

Q3 Results

 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. has areas requiring minor improvement.

 

Third Quarter 2013

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

22

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Overview Q3 

2013OCWEN*Resul

Q3 

2013OCWEN*Ratin

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 4.4% ***

9 

2.0% 2.3% **

10 

2.0% 0.0% ***

12 

2.0% 0.5% ***

13 

5.0% 0.0% ***

22 

2.0% 0.5% ***

23 

5.0% 3.3% ***

Q3 Results

 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 After considering all relevant factors, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC servicer incentives will 

 not be withheld at this time.

Third Quarter 2013

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

23

OneWest Bank

Overview Q3 

2013ONEWESTRes

Q3 

2013ONEWESTRati

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 0.0% ***

9 

2.0% 1.0% ***

10 

2.0% 0.0% ***

12 

2.0% 1.0% ***

13 

5.0% 1.6% ***

22 

2.0% 0.3% ***

23 

5.0% 0.0% ***

Q3 Results

 OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

 

Third Quarter 2013

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

24

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

Overview Q3 2013SPSResult Q3 2013SPSRating

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 1.8% ***

9 

2.0% 1.7% ***

10 

2.0% 0.0% ***

12 

2.0% 2.1% **

13 

5.0% 0.0% ***

22 

2.0% 0.5% ***

23 

5.0% 0.0% ***

Q3 Results

 Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 After considering all relevant factors, Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. servicer incentives will 

 not be withheld at this time.

Third Quarter 2013

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

25

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Overview Q3 

2013WELLSResult

Q3 

2013WELLSRating

 These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of servicers' adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Q3 2013 Q3 2013

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating

8 

5.0% 2.9% ***

9 

2.0% 4.4% **

10 

2.0% 0.0% ***

12 

2.0% 1.0% ***

13 

5.0% 3.5% ***

22 

2.0% 1.5% ***

23 

5.0% 6.7% **

Q3 Results

 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will 

 not be withheld at this time.

Third Quarter 2013

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and 

communicates appropriately with potentially eligible 

MHA homeowners.

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had assigned a Single 

Point of Contact to a borrower in accordance with MHA guidelines

Second Look % Disagree 

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

applicable programs

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

determination for applicable programs

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates 

homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs and 

accurately communicates decisions. 

Income Calculation Error % 

Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 

5% for applicable programs

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance

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

notices sent to borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in accordance with MHA 

guidelines

Program Management and Reporting

Assesses whether the servicer has effective 

program management and submits timely and 

accurate program reports and information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors 

Average percentage of differences in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between 

servicer files and the MHA system of record for applicable programs

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance

Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with servicer's processing of defaulted 

HAMP modifications, in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

Second Look % Disagree*

Servicer Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013

Bank of America, N.A. 2.4% 1.5% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.2% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc. 4.0% 2.0% 0.5% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 6.7% 1.3% 4.7% 5.6%

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 3.9% 1.6% 1.2% 0.0% 0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.7% 1.0%

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 6.3% 6.7% 2.7% 0.0% 0.7% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 3.1% 2.3%

OneWest Bank 4.7% 6.7% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0%

Select Portfolio Servicing, 

Inc. 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2.0% 1.3% 2.0% 1.7%

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 1.7% 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 1.0% 1.3% 3.0% 1.3% 3.0% 4.4%

Starting with the third quarter of 

2013, the Servicer Assessment has 

been enhanced to present new 

compliance metrics and related 

benchmarks, including a 

methodology change to the metrics 

on this page. The coverage of these 

metrics now includes additional 

MHA components and programs, 

such as HAMP Tier 2, and the Second 

Lien Modification Program. Thus, 

the results of these metrics starting 

in Q3 2013 are not entirely 

comparable to previous quarters.

* 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.

*** Income Calculation Error %: 

Percentage of loans for which MHAC’s income calculation differs from 

the servicer’s by more than 5%. 

 

Note: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 

includes loans previously reported 

under Litton Loan Servicing LP, 

Homeward Residential, Inc. and 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: 4th Quarter 2010–3rd Quarter 2013

26

Second Look % Unable to Determine**

Servicer Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013

Bank of America, N.A. 19.6% 18.8% 8.2% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc. 12.3% 13.3% 5.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 3.8% 6.0% 4.7% 0.0% 0.0%

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 16.0% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7% 1.4% 3.8% 3.1% 2.7% 2.0%

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 24.7% 10.3% 3.0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0%

OneWest Bank 12.3% 3.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Select Portfolio Servicing, 

Inc. 17.0% 2.3% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0%

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 6.8% 6.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 1.0% 0.5% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0%

Income Calculation Error Rate***

Servicer Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013

Bank of America, N.A. 22.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0% 6.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0% 1.0% 3.0% 3.0% 1.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc. 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 6.0% 3.0% 4.0% 1.0% 3.1% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 0.0%

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 31.0% 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 18.0% 33.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.3% 0.5%

OneWest Bank 11.0% 11.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0%

Select Portfolio Servicing, 

Inc. 22.0% 15.0% 10.0% 3.2% 1.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.1% 2.1%

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 27.0% 27.0% 4.4% 5.5% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0%
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

27

Trials Aged 6+ Months (% of Active Trials)

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

Bank of

America, N.A.

CitiMortgage

Inc.

JPMorgan

Chase Bank,

N.A.

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

OneWest Bank Select Portfolio

Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Q1

Q2

Q3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Bank of

America, N.A.

CitiMortgage

Inc.

JPMorgan

Chase Bank,

N.A.

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

OneWest Bank Select Portfolio

Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Q1

Q2

Q3

This quarterly metric measures trials lasting 

six months or longer as a share of all active 

trials. These figures include trial 

modifications that have been cancelled or 

converted to permanent modifications by the 

servicer and are pending reporting to the 

program system of record. Additionally, 

servicers may process cancellations of 

permanent modifications for reasons, 

including but not limited to, data corrections, 

loan repurchase agreements, etc. This 

process requires reverting the impacted 

permanent modifications to trials in the 

HAMP system of record with re-boarding of 

some of these permanent modifications in 

subsequent reporting periods.

Quarterly Program Performance Metrics Q1-Q3 2013

This quarterly metric measures servicer 

response time for homeowner inquiries 

escalated to MHA Support Centers. Effective 

February 1, 2011, a target of 30 calendar 

days was established for non-GSE escalation 

cases, including an estimated 5 days 

processing by the MHA Support Centers. The 

methodology for calculating average days to 

respond to escalated cases includes non-GSE 

cases escalated on or after February 1, 2011. 

Investor denial cases escalated prior to 

November 1, 2011, cases involving 

bankruptcy and those that did not require 

servicer actions are not included in the 

calculation of servicer time to resolve 

escalations.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

28

Timely Reporting of Permanent Modifications (% Reported within the Month of Conversion)

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

Bank of

America, N.A.

CitiMortgage

Inc.

JPMorgan Chase

Bank, N.A.

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

OneWest Bank Select Portfolio

Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Q1

Q2

Q3

Missing Permanent Modification Status Reports (%)

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

Bank of

America, N.A.

CitiMortgage

Inc.

JPMorgan Chase

Bank, N.A.

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

OneWest Bank Select Portfolio

Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Q1

Q2

Q3

Quarterly Program Performance Metrics Q1-Q3 2013

This quarterly metric measures the servicer’s 

ability to promptly report on the current 

status of permanent modifications. 

Inconsistent and untimely reporting of 

modification status reports may impact 

incentive compensation and loan 

performance analysis.

Treasury revised its Federally Declared 

Disaster (FDD) guidance, allowing servicers to 

suspend the reporting of permanent 

modification status for loans where the 

homeowner was impacted by Hurricane 

Sandy or any other FDD. This revised 

guidance may impact missing permanent 

modification status reporting.

This quarterly metric measures the servicer’s 

ability to promptly report the conversion 

from a trial to a permanent modification. 

Untimely reporting of permanent 

modification conversions impacts incentive 

compensation, including the possible delay of 

borrower incentives. In addition, it hinders 

the effectiveness of program monitoring and 

transparency. 
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Description of Metrics

Compliance Metrics

Single Point of Contact Assignment % Noncompliance: 

Servicers are required to assign certain delinquent 

borrowers to a Single Point of Contact (SPOC). This 

metric measures the percentage of loans reviewed 

where MHA-C did not concur that the servicer had 

assigned a SPOC to a borrower in a timely fashion and 

otherwise in accordance with MHA guidelines. 

For SPOC Assignment Noncompliance results, remedial 

actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but 

are not limited to: assigning a SPOC to the borrower, 

and correcting system and operational processes such 

that SPOCs are properly assigned to borrowers in a 

timely fashion.

Second Look % Disagree: 

Second Look is a process in which MHA-C reviews loans 

not in a permanent modification, to assess the 

timeliness and accuracy of the servicer’s borrower 

outreach and eligibility review in order to verify that 

the borrower was properly considered, denied or 

deemed ineligible for receiving a permanent 

modification. This metric measures the percentage of 

loans reviewed in Second Look where MHA-C did not 

concur with a servicer’s solicitation efforts and/or 

eligibility review. 

Second Look % Unable to Determine: 

This metric measures the percentage of loans 

reviewed in Second Look for which MHA-C is not able 

to determine, based on the documentation provided, 

whether the borrower was properly considered, 

denied or deemed ineligible for receiving a permanent 

modification.

For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to 

Determine results, remedial actions Treasury requires 

servicers to take include, but are not limited to: 

reconsidering borrowers for a modification if they 

were not properly solicited or incorrectly evaluated, 

retaining documentation to support solicitation efforts 

and eligibility determination, and, if applicable, 

engaging in systemic process remediation. All loans 

categorized as Disagree or Unable to Determine 

remain on foreclosure hold until the servicer 

completes the appropriate corrective actions.

Income Calculation Error %: 

Correctly calculating homeowners’ monthly income is 

a critical component of evaluating eligibility for MHA, 

as well as establishing an accurate modification 

payment. This metric measures how often MHA-C 

disagrees with a servicer’s calculation of a borrower’s 

Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up to a 5% 

differential from MHA-C’s calculations. 

For Income Calculation Errors, remedial actions 

Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not 

limited to: correcting income errors, requiring the 

servicer to review their own income calculation 

accuracy, enhancing policies and procedures, and 

conducting staff training on income calculation. 

Non-Approval Notice % Noncompliance: 

Correctly communicating reasons for non-approval 

may affect borrowers’ awareness of other foreclosure 

alternatives or the ability to challenge the nonapproval. This metric measures the percentage of 

loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the 

completion or accuracy of the notices sent to 

borrowers communicating reasons for non-approval, in 

accordance with MHA guidelines. 

For Non-Approval Notice results, remedial actions 

Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not 

limited to: correcting the non-approval letter 

template, and engaging in systemic process 

remediation in order to deliver accurate non-approval 

notices.

Incentive Payment Data Errors: 

Treasury provides incentives for servicers, investors, 

and homeowners for permanent modifications 

completed under MHA. Although intended for 

different recipients, all incentives are initially paid to 

servicers to distribute to the appropriate parties. Data 

that servicers report to the program system of record 

is used to calculate the incentives due to servicers, 

investors, and homeowners. This metric measures how 

data anomalies between servicer loan files and the 

reported information affect incentive payments. 

For Incentive Payment Data Error results, remedial 

actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but 

are not limited to: correcting the identified errors and 

correcting system and operational processes such that 

accurate data is mapped to its appropriate places in 

the program system of record. 

Disqualified Modification % Noncompliance: 

Permanent modifications on which borrowers lose 

good standing are subsequently disqualified from the 

program. This metric measures the percentage of 

loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with a 

servicer’s processing of defaulted HAMP modifications, 

in accordance with MHA guidelines. 

For Disqualified Modification results, remedial actions 

Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not 

limited to: correcting the status of improperly 

disqualified modifications and reporting the corrected 

data to the program system of record.

For more information on the assessments, please visit: 

www.FinancialStability.gov.

29
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

HAMP Terms and Methodology:

Average Delinquency at Trial Start:

For all permanent modifications started, the average 

number of days delinquent as of the trial plan start 

date. Delinquency is calculated as the number of days 

between the homeowner's last paid installment before 

the trial plan and the first payment due date of the trial 

plan.

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio:

Ratio of total monthly debt payments (including 

mortgage principal and interest, taxes, insurance, 

homeowners association and/or condo fees, plus 

payments on installment debts, junior liens, alimony, 

car lease payments and investment property payments) 

to monthly gross income. Homeowners who have a 

back-end debt-to-income ratio of greater than 55% are 

required to seek housing counseling under program 

guidelines.

Conversion Rate:

Ratio of permanent modifications to trials eligible to 

convert, defined as 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. 

Disqualification:

A permanent modification disqualifies from HAMP 

when the borrower has missed the equivalent of three 

full monthly payments. Once disqualified, the borrower 

is no longer eligible to receive HAMP incentives. 

However, the terms of the permanent modification 

remain the same, and the servicer will continue to work 

with the borrower to cure the delinquency or identify 

other loss mitigation options.

Eligible Loans:

Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include 

conventional loans that were originated on or before 

January 1, 2009; excludes loans with current unpaid 

principal balances greater than current conforming loan 

limits-current unpaid principal balance must be no 

greater than: $729,750 for a single-unit property, 2 

units: $934,200, 3 Units: $1,129,250, 4 Units: 

$1,403,400; FHA and VA loans; loans where investor 

pooling and servicing agreements preclude 

modification; and manufactured housing loans with 

title/chattel issues that exclude them from HAMP. 

Evaluation Complete: 

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.

Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio:

Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, 

insurance and homeowners association and/or condo 

fees) to monthly gross income. 

Median Monthly Housing Payment:

Principal and interest payment. Before modification 

payment is homeowner’s current payment at time of 

evaluation.

RPC: 

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. 

Total Active:

Reflects active HAMP trials and permanent 

modifications.

Trial Plan Offers Extended:

Includes all HAMP mortgage modification requests 

approved where trial plan offers were sent to the 

borrowers, including multiple offers made on a loan. All 

Trial Plan Offers Extended do not become HAMP Trials 

Started because some borrowers do not accept the trial 

or fail to make the first trial payment.

Appendix A1: Terms and Methodology

30
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

31

General MHA Program Notes:

MHA Program Effective Dates:

 HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009

 PRA: October 1, 2010

 2MP: August 13, 2009

 HAFA: April 5, 2010

1MP, PRA, Treasury FHA-HAMP, RD-HAMP, 2MP, and 

HAFA Program Metrics: Data includes activity reported 

into the HAMP system of record through the end of 

cycle for the current reporting month, though the 

effective date may occur in the following month.

MHA First Lien Program Notes:

MHA First Lien Permanent Modifications Started 

includes: HAMP Tier 1, HAMP Tier 2, GSE Standard 

Modifications and both Treasury FHA- and RD-HAMP. 

HAMP Tier 1 includes both GSE and Non-GSE 

modifications. The GSEs do no participate in HAMP Tier 

2, however the GSE Standard Modification is similar to 

HAMP Tier 2. FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP are similar to 

HAMP Tier 1. 

GSE Standard Modification data is provided by Fannie 

Mae and Freddie Mac as of October 2013. The GSEs 

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 Second Quarter 

of 2013, since 4Q 2008, the GSEs have completed more 

than 1.4 million permanent modifications, which 

includes their activity under MHA. Please visit 

www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. 

Treasury FHA-HAMP Program Notes: 

The FHA undertakes other foreclosure prevention 

activities beyond their participation in MHA which is not 

reflected in this report. As reported in the November 

2013 edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing 

Scorecard, FHA has offered more than 2 million loss 

mitigation and early delinquency interventions through 

October 31, 2013 since April 1, 2009, which includes 

their activity under MHA.

2MP Program Notes:

Number of modifications started is net of cancellations, 

which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

2MP loans previously reported under top servicers that 

were transferred to or acquired by non-participating 

2MP servicers are reflected in “Other Servicers.”

HAFA Program Notes:

Unless otherwise noted, HAFA Transactions Completed 

includes GSE activity under the MHA program in 

addition to the GSE Standard HAFA program 

implemented in November 2012. GSE Standard HAFA 

data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of 

October 2013. It 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 Second Quarter of 2013, since 

4Q 2008 the GSEs have completed over 500,000 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. 

The debt relief represents the obligation relieved by the 

short sale or deed-in-lieu transaction and is calculated 

as the unpaid principal balance and allowable 

transactions costs less the property sales price. The 

allowable transaction costs may include release of any 

subordinate lien, borrower relocation assistance, sales 

commission, and closing costs for taxes, title, and 

attorney fees.

PRA Program Notes:

Eligible loans include those receiving evaluation under 

HAMP PRA guidelines plus loans that did not require an 

evaluation but received principal reduction on their 

modification.

UP Program Notes: 

Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP 

participation through September 30, 2013.

Appendix A2: General Program Notes
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

SUMMARY AND PROGRAM RESULTS:

1. This does not include trial modifications that have 

cancelled or not yet converted to permanent 

modifications, or HAFA transactions started but 

not yet completed.

2. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into 

the HAMP system of record at any time.

3. Includes some modifications with additional 

principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA.

4. Under HAMP PRA, principal reduction vests over a 3-year period. The amounts noted reflect the 

entire amount that may be forgiven.

5. Principal amount reduced as a percentage of 

before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization.

6. Subject to investor restrictions. Effective February 

1, 2013, Supplemental Directive 12-09 expanded 

the acceptable DTI range for Tier 2 to 10-55%.

7. For active permanent modifications. Median % 

reflects percent of the median monthly payment 

before modification.

SERVICER RESULTS:

8. As reported into the HAMP system of record by 

servicers. Excludes Treasury FHA-HAMP 

modifications. Totals reflect impact of servicing 

transfers. Servicers may enter new trial 

modifications into the HAMP system of record at 

any time.

9. 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. 

10. Includes Non-GSE activity under the MHA program 

only. Servicer GSE program data not available.

11. As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large 

SPA servicers through October 31, 2013. Figures 

do not reflect the impact of servicing transfers.

12. These figures include trial modifications that have 

been converted to permanent modifications, but 

not reported as such in the HAMP system of 

record. Additionally, servicers may process 

cancellations of permanent modifications for 

reasons, including but not limited to, data 

corrections, loan repurchase agreements, etc. This 

process requires reverting the impacted 

permanent modifications to trials in the HAMP 

system of record with re-boarding of some of 

these permanent modifications in subsequent 

reporting periods. Prior to being re-boarded as 

permanent modifications, these modifications are 

reported as Active Trials. These modifications may 

be 6 months or more beyond their first trial 

payment due date resulting in their classification 

as an Aged Trials. As a result, fluctuations are 

expected in this population.

13. Data is as reported by servicers for actions 

completed through September 30, 2013 and 

reflects the status of homeowners as of that date; 

a homeowner's status may change over time. 

Survey data is not subject to the same data quality 

checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of 

record. Excludes cancellations and 

disqualifications pending data corrections and 

loans otherwise removed from servicing 

portfolios.

Appendix A3: End Notes

32
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 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

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

Glass City Federal Credit Union

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.2

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, LLC3

OneWest Bank

ORNL Federal Credit Union

Pathfinder Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage4

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, Inc.

Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial 

Services, Inc.

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.5

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 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation. 3 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes loans previously reported under Litton Loan Servicing LP, 

Homeward Residential, Inc. and GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

4 Formerly National City Bank.

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

Appendix A4: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP

33
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2013

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC

OneWest Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

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

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4

FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP)

Amarillo National Bank

American Financial Resources Inc. 

Aurora Financial Group, Inc. 

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 

Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC 

Green Tree Servicing, LLC 

Guaranty Bank 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

James B. Nutter & Company 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 2

M&T Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Marsh Associates, Inc. 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC5

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC 

PNC Mortgage3

Residential Credit Solutions 

Schmidt Mortgage Company 

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

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

Stockman Bank of Montana 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4

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 

Green Tree Servicing, LLC

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

PNC Bank, National Association 

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4

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.2

Magna Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.4

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

Mortgage, LLC. 

Appendix A5: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs

34