Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

40-41

Report Highlights

More Than 880,000 Homeowners Granted Permanent Modifications

• Program to date, homeowners in permanent modifications have saved an 

estimated $9.4 billion in monthly mortgage payments. Homeowners in active first 

lien permanent modifications save a median of $527 per month – more than onethird of the median before-modification payment.

• This month, additional detail on the Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) is 

available, including activity by servicer. Homeowners in modifications with the 

PRA feature have experienced a median principal reduction of nearly one-third of 

the before-modification principal balance. 

• Program data indicate that participants in PRA are further underwater and more 

seriously delinquent at trial start than the overall population of HAMP 

participants. 89% of homeowners in the PRA program are at least 60 days 

delinquent at trial start (compared to 79% of the overall portfolio) with a beforemodification loan-to-value ratio of 158% (compared to 120% for the overall HAMP 

portfolio). 

This Month: Q3 2011 Servicer Assessment Results

• For the third quarter of 2011, one servicer was determined to need substantial 

improvement in their compliance with MHA guidelines. This servicer was also in 

need of substantial improvement for the first and second quarter of 2011, and 

their servicer incentives will continue to be withheld.

• Two servicers met the established benchmarks for program compliance, indicating 

that they require just minor improvement on the areas reviewed for the third 

quarter. Seven servicers were found to need moderate improvement, with the 

continued withholding of servicer incentives for one of them.

Inside:

SUMMARY RESULTS:

First Lien Modification Activity

First Lien Modification Characteristics/ 

Modifications By Investor Type

Principal Reduction Alternative

Activity for 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP, HAFA 

and UP

HAMP Activity by State

HAMP Activity by MSA/

Homeowner Outreach

Aged Trials

SERVICER RESULTS:

First Lien Modification Activity by

Servicer

First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA

Activity by Servicer

Trial Length

Conversion Rate

Homeowner Experience

Disposition of Homeowners Not in 

HAMP

APPENDICES:

Participants in MHA Programs

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14-15

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:

Overview

Servicer Results

Description of Metrics

16-18

19-38

39
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

HAMP Activity: First Lien Modifications

Total

HAMP Eligibility 

(As of Sep. 30, 2011)

Eligible Delinquent Loans1 2,507,171

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2 965,579

Trial

Modifications

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3 1,948,316

All Trials Started 1,735,457

Trials Reported Since September 2011 Report4 21,445

Trial Modifications Canceled (Cumulative) 767,321

Active Trials 85,060

Permanent 

Modifications

All Permanent Modifications Started 883,076

Permanent Modifications Reported Since 

September 2011 Report 26,102

Permanent Modifications Canceled 

(Cumulative)5 147,612

Active Permanent Modifications 735,464

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of September 30, 2011, include conventional 

loans: 

 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.

 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a one-unit property, $934,200 on a two-unit 

property, $1,129,250 on a three-unit property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.

 on a property that was owner-occupied at origination.

 originated on or before January 1, 2009.

Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans exclude: 

 FHA and VA loans.

 loans that are current or less than 60 days delinquent, which may be eligible for HAMP if a borrower is in imminent 

default. 2 The estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers are those in HAMP-eligible loans, minus estimated exclusions of 

loans on vacant properties, loans with borrower debt-to-income ratio below 31%, loans that fail the NPV test, 

properties no longer owner-occupied, unemployed borrowers, manufactured housing loans with title/chattel issues 

that exclude them from HAMP, loans where the investor pooling and servicing agreements preclude modification, 

and trial and permanent modifications disqualified from HAMP. Exclusions for DTI and NPV results are estimated 

using market analytics. 3 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through October 31, 2011. 4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime. 5 A permanent modification is canceled when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Includes 

2,399 loans paid off.

HAMP is designed to lower monthly mortgage payments to help struggling 

homeowners stay in their homes and prevent avoidable foreclosure. 

Note: Unless specified, exhibits in this report refer to HAMP first lien modification activity. 

2

HAMP Trials Started

1,511

1,545

1,580

1,612

1,638

1,663

1,684

1,704

1,722 1,735

0

50

100

1,350

1,400

1,450

1,500

1,550

1,600

1,650

1,700

1,750

1,800

Jan 2011 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct

New Trials Started (000s)

All Trials Started (000s)

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

Source: HAMP system of record. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of 

record at any time. For example, 21,445 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior 

report; 13,067 were trials with a first payment recorded in October 2011. 

Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

608

634

670

699

731

763

791

817

857

883

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

Jan 2011 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct

All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

Source: HAMP system of record. 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent 

modifications are:

• 62.2% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or 

unemployment)

• 11.0% reported excessive obligation

• 3.0% reported an illness of the principal borrower

Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics

Loan Characteristic

Before 

Modification

After 

Modification

Median 

Decrease

Front-End Debt-to-Income 

Ratio1 45.2% 31.0% -14.3 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income 

Ratio2 78.2% 61.3% -14.7 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing 

Payment3 $1,427.88 $830.54 -$527.05

1 Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo 

fees) to monthly gross income. 

2 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. Borrowers who have a back-end debt-to-income ratio of 

greater than 55% are required to seek housing counseling under program guidelines.

3 Principal and interest payment. 

Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications

• Of trial modifications started, 79% 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. 

3

• Aggregate savings to homeowners who received HAMP first 

lien permanent modifications are estimated to total nearly 

$9.4 billion, program to date, compared with unmodified 

mortgage obligations.

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active permanent 

first lien modifications is $527.05, or 37% of the median 

monthly payment before modification. 

• Active permanent modifications feature the following modification 

steps:

• 98.3% feature interest rate reductions

• 58.8% offer term extension

• 30.9% include principal forbearance

1 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and 

Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.

3 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

Modifications by Investor Type (Large Servicers)

Servicer GSE Private Portfolio

Total Active 

Modifications

American Home Mortgage 

Servicing Inc. 1,307 25,743 - 27,050 

Bank of America, NA1 96,741 60,370 10,152 167,263 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 31,701 5,653 17,289 54,643 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 24,816 5,800 11,568 42,184 

JPMorgan Chase NA2 58,731 51,145 23,922 133,798 

Litton Loan Servicing LP 81 11,924 8 12,013 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 6,990 23,635 112 30,737 

OneWest Bank 14,673 14,755 2,513 31,941 

Select Portfolio Servicing 523 16,282 2,536 19,341 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 3 51,277 15,876 44,815 111,968 

Other HAMP Servicers 139,484 33,650 16,452 189,586 

Total 426,324 264,833 129,367 820,524 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

4

Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA)

1 PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization. 2 Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without the PRA feature. 3 Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

4 Because the first step of the standard HAMP waterfall includes the capitalization of accrued interest, outof-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 loanto-value ratio can increase in the modification process.

PRA Activity Modification Characteristics

Loan Characteristics All 1MP2 1MP with PRA

Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:

- At least 60 days delinquent 79% 89%

- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default 21% 11%

Top three States by Activity3, Percent of Total Activity:

- California 25% 30%

- Florida 12% 17%

- Illinois 5% 6%

Top three States’ Percent of Total 42% 53%

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

- Before Modification 120% 158%

- After Modification4 123% 115%

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

- Front-End DTI 45.2% 44.8%

- Back-End DTI 78.2% 71.9%

All PRA Trial Modifications Started 53,323

PRA Trial Modifications Active 17,046

All PRA Permanent Modifications Started 33,376

PRA Permanent Modifications Active 32,171

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent 

Modifications $65,172

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent 

Modifications (%)1 31.3%

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.

To date, the 10 largest MHA servicers account for 97% of all trial modifications started 

with PRA, and the top three MHA servicers account for 68% of all PRA volume (and over 

50% of overall HAMP volume). (See page 10 for additional servicer detail.)

While the population of loan modifications with the PRA feature is still relatively small, the 

program data indicate that there are more homeowners seriously delinquent at the time of 

trial start than the overall population of HAMP borrowers.

Overall, homeowners receiving permanent loan modifications with the PRA feature also have 

a higher before-modification LTV ratio than those without the PRA feature.

The Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) was implemented in October 2010. PRA requires servicers of non-GSE loans to evaluate the 

benefit of principal reduction for mortgages with a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 115% or greater when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP 

first lien modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for PRA, they are not required to offer principal reduction and 

generally may only do so when permitted by the mortgage investor.

PRA pays investors incentives for every dollar of principal forgiven, according to a sliding scale and depending on the degree to which the 

homeowner's unmodified balance is greater than the market value of the home. PRA can be a feature of a HAMP trial or permanent 

modification.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA) offers incentives for 

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

foreclosure. HAFA has established important homeowner protections and an industry 

standard for streamlined transactions. In 22% of HAFA agreements started, the 

homeowner began a HAMP trial modification but later requested a HAFA agreement 

or was disqualified from HAMP. 

5

All HAFA Agreements Started1 34,605

HAFA Agreements Active 8,818

HAFA Transactions Completed 20,701

Completed Transactions – Short Sale 20,110

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu 591

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity

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 (through Sep. 2011) 16,151

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 13,313

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 2,838

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

1 Servicer agreement with homeowner for terms of potential short sale, which lasts at least 120 days; or 

agreement for a deed-in-lieu transaction. A short sale requires a third-party purchaser and cooperation of junior 

lienholders and mortgage insurers to complete the transaction. All HAFA Agreements Started include HAFA 

Agreements Active, HAFA Transactions Completed, and HAFA Transactions Canceled.

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through Sep. 30, 2011. 

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

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. 2MP requires 

that the first lien HAMP modification be permanent and active and that the second 

lien have an unpaid balance of more than $5,000 and a monthly payment of $100 or 

greater.

All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1 50,434

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien 

Extinguishments 8,634

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2 922

Active Second Lien Modifications 40,878

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity 

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

2011 data, though the effective date may occur in November. Number of modifications is net of cancellations, 

which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

2 Includes 70 loans paid off. 

3 Second lien modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate reduction, term 

extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:

Second Lien Partially Extinguished 1,569

Second Lien Loan Modifications3 39,309

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Average Amount of Full Extinguishment $70,356

Average Amount of Partial Extinguishment $7,037

The Treasury FHA-HAMP Program provides assistance to eligible homeowners 

with FHA-insured mortgages.

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started 6,952

Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 4,900

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

6

Note: Includes active trial and permanent 

modifications from the official HAMP system of 

record.

Source: 3rd Quarter 2011 

National Delinquency 

Survey, Mortgage 

Bankers Association.

State

Active 

Trials

Permanent 

Modifications

State 

Total1

% of 

U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity State

Active 

Trials

Permanent 

Modifications

State 

Total1

% of 

U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

AK 48 316 364 0.0% MT 90 849 939 0.1%

AL 502 4,111 4,613 0.6% NC 1,403 13,220 14,623 1.8%

AR 197 1,599 1,796 0.2% ND 16 120 136 0.0%

AZ 2,618 32,361 34,979 4.3% NE 105 997 1,102 0.1%

CA 20,457 182,514 202,971 24.7% NH 390 3,320 3,710 0.5%

CO 1,065 10,104 11,169 1.4% NJ 2,963 23,525 26,488 3.2%

CT 1,056 9,118 10,174 1.2% NM 304 2,371 2,675 0.3%

DC 165 1,227 1,392 0.2% NV 1,761 18,433 20,194 2.5%

DE 272 2,229 2,501 0.3% NY 5,095 34,119 39,214 4.8%

FL 11,311 88,022 99,333 12.1% OH 1,872 15,980 17,852 2.2%

GA 3,157 26,538 29,695 3.6% OK 237 1,666 1,903 0.2%

HI 270 2,800 3,070 0.4% OR 860 8,028 8,888 1.1%

IA 217 1,824 2,041 0.2% PA 1,754 15,005 16,759 2.0%

ID 304 2,840 3,144 0.4% RI 396 3,809 4,205 0.5%

IL 4,480 39,180 43,660 5.3% SC 821 6,843 7,664 0.9%

IN 833 6,999 7,832 1.0% SD 28 269 297 0.0%

KS 231 1,717 1,948 0.2% TN 946 7,498 8,444 1.0%

KY 311 2,759 3,070 0.4% TX 2,631 19,065 21,696 2.6%

LA 606 4,027 4,633 0.6% UT 620 6,943 7,563 0.9%

MA 1,966 17,963 19,929 2.4% VA 1,770 17,610 19,380 2.4%

MD 2,545 23,451 25,996 3.2% VT 88 615 703 0.1%

ME 273 2,026 2,299 0.3% WA 1,952 14,747 16,699 2.0%

MI 2,365 23,618 25,983 3.2% WI 848 7,005 7,853 1.0%

MN 1,068 12,408 13,476 1.6% WV 105 1,044 1,149 0.1%

MO 840 7,501 8,341 1.0% WY 32 374 406 0.0%

MS 324 2,699 3,023 0.4% Other2 492 2,058 2,550 0.3%

1 Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

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

60+ Day Delinquency Rate

5.0% and lower 10.01% - 15.0% 20.01% 

5.01% - 10.0% 15.01% - 20.0% and higher

HAMP Modifications

5,000 and lower 20,001 – 35,000

5,001 – 10,000 35,001 and higher

10,001 – 20,000 

HAMP Activity by State Modification Activity by State

Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by 

Treasury and Partners (cumulative) 60

Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events 

(cumulative) 59,519

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1 8,039,131

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov

(October 2011) 2,407,850

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative) 129,244,991

1 Source: Survey data provided by SPA servicers. Servicers are encouraged by HAMP to solicit information from 

borrowers 60+ days delinquent, regardless of eligibility for a HAMP modification. 

Program to 

Date October

Total Number of Calls Taken at 

1-888-995-HOPE 2,605,355 67,411

Borrowers Receiving Free Housing 

Counseling Assistance Through the 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

1,237,497 31,662

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Volume

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records.

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

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

7

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Active

Trials

Permanent

Modifications

Total MSA 

HAMP 

Activity

% of U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, 

CA 6,949 54,693 61,642 7.5%

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA 6,424 45,989 52,413 6.4%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 4,336 37,967 42,303 5.2%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, 

CA 3,461 38,594 42,055 5.1%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano 

Beach, FL 5,272 36,360 41,632 5.1%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 1,965 26,294 28,259 3.4%

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, 

DC-VA-MD-WV 2,476 24,992 27,468 3.3%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 2,513 21,446 23,959 2.9%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 2,064 14,976 17,040 2.1%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 1,467 15,142 16,609 2.0%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 1,435 14,323 15,758 1.9%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA 1,479 13,615 15,094 1.8%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,490 13,147 14,637 1.8%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 1,426 12,903 14,329 1.7%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, 

CA 1,323 12,633 13,956 1.7%

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

Note: Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

Aged Trials1

190,412

165,543

117,574

94,269

76,502

69,418

49,229

39,753 36,184 32,017 26,362 25,390 23,552 23,014 23,061 27,345

19,793 18,359

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

May 

2010

June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan 2011 Feb March April May June July Aug Sep Oct

Trials Lasting 6 Months or Longer At End of Month

1 Active trials initiated at least six months ago. See page 9 for number of aged trials by servicer. These figures include trial modifications that have been 

converted to permanent modifications or cancelled by the servicer and are pending reporting to the HAMP system of record. 

The number of active trials lasting 6 months or longer is below 18,400.

Program guidance directs servicers to cancel or convert trial modifications after three 

or four monthly payments, depending on circumstances.

8
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

As of 

Sep. 30, 2011 Cumulative As of Oct. 31, 2011

Servicer 

Estimated 

Eligible 60+ 

Day Delinquent

Borrowers1 

Trial Plan 

Offers 

Extended2

All HAMP 

Trials 

Started3

All HAMP 

Permanent 

Modifications

Started3

Trial 

Modifications 

Reported Since 

September 2011

Report3

Active Trial 

Modifications3

Active Trial 

Modifications 

Lasting 6

Months or 

Longer4

Active 

Permanent 

Modifications3

American Home Mortgage Servicing 

Inc. 38,485 41,067 37,058 29,101 1,021 3,227 237 23,823

Bank of America, NA5 221,612 508,498 416,925 181,284 3,475 15,043 5,569 152,220

CitiMortgage, Inc. 71,333 189,961 134,759 58,369 320 4,582 1,689 50,061

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 25,789 79,530 65,324 48,371 783 2,445 67 39,739

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA6 158,829 337,767 288,816 134,269 7,559 24,362 4,931 109,436

Litton Loan Servicing LP7 32,742 43,955 38,309 13,503 14 1,686 477 10,327

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 34,536 50,860 48,535 37,880 470 2,710 403 28,027

OneWest Bank 33,707 73,765 56,871 32,361 679 3,883 201 28,058

Select Portfolio Servicing 3,893 68,726 42,526 23,552 135 530 17 18,811

Wells Fargo Bank, NA8 123,003 333,917 246,738 118,689 2,303 10,364 1,364 101,604

Other SPA Servicers9 93,509 220,270 220,304 115,966 2,501 7,290 1,244 96,795

Other GSE Servicers10 128,141 NA 139,292 89,731 2,185 8,938 2,160 76,563

Total 965,579 1,948,316 1,735,457 883,076 21,445 85,060 18,359 735,464

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer

9

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers as reported by servicers as 

of Sep. 30, 2011, include those in conventional loans: 

 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.

 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a one-unit 

property, $934,200 on a two-unit property, $1,129,250 on a three-unit 

property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.

 on a property that was owner-occupied at origination.

 originated on or before January 1, 2009.

Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers exclude: 

 Those in FHA and VA loans.

 Those in loans that are current or less than 60 days delinquent, which 

may be eligible for HAMP if a borrower is in imminent default.

 Those borrowers with debt-to-income ratios less than 31% or a negative 

NPV test.

 Owners of vacant properties or properties otherwise excluded.

 HAMP Trials and Permanent Modifications disqualified from HAMP.

 Unemployed borrowers.

Exclusions for DTI and NPV are estimated using market analytics. 2 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through 

Oct. 31, 2011. 3 As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes FHAHAMP modifications. Subject to adjustment based on servicer 

reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing 

transfers. In cases where servicing transfers exceed new trial 

modifications reported, negative numbers are not presented. Servicers 

may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any 

time. 4 These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to 

permanent modifications or cancelled by the servicer and are pending 

reporting to the HAMP system of record. 5 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC 

Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit 

Corporation. 6 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under 

EMC Mortgage Corporation. 7 Due to the acquisition of Litton Loan Servicing LP (Litton) by Ocwen Loan 

Servicing, LLC (Ocwen), Litton’s portfolio is being transferred to Ocwen. 

As a result, Litton’s August survey results for the estimated eligible 60+ 

Day Delinquent Borrowers are used in this month’s report. In the future, 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Litton Loan Servicing LP will be reported 

on a consolidated basis. 8 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under 

Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. 9 Other SPA servicers are entities excluding the 10 largest servicers, by cap 

amount, that have signed participation agreements with Treasury and 

Fannie Mae. A full list of participating servicers is in Appendix A1. 10 Includes servicers of loans owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and 

Freddie Mac. Includes GSE loans previously transferred from SPA 

servicers.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

10

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1

1 MHA Program Effective Dates:

HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009

PRA: October 1, 2010

2MP: August 13, 2009

HAFA: April 5, 2010

2While 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. See page 3 for additional servicer detail on 

HAMP activity by investor type.

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

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

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

modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time.

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

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

due to servicer data corrections.

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

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

complete the transaction. 

6 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans 

Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

7

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage 

Corporation.

8 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, 

FSB. 

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

HAMP First Lien Modifications

HAMP First Lien Modifications 

With Principal Reduction 

Alternative (PRA)2

Second Lien 

Modification 

(2MP)

Home Affordable Foreclosure 

Alternatives (HAFA)

Servicer

Trials 

Started3

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started3

Trials 

Started3

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started3

Modifications 

Started4

Agreements 

Started5

Agreements 

Completed

American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. 37,058 29,101 0 0 N/A 415 165

Bank of America, NA6 416,925 181,284 13,203 9,922 19,177 4,938 3,808

CitiMortgage, Inc. 134,759 58,369 1,949 1,370 7,161 26 19

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 65,324 48,371 835 429 2,751 1,260 754

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA7 288,816 134,269 10,401 3,862 9,350 12,575 7,230

Litton Loan Servicing LP 38,309 13,503 3,297 2,222 N/A 1,312 713

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 48,535 37,880 6,845 4,400 N/A 258 92

OneWest Bank 56,871 32,361 2,694 1,515 1,091 1,026 463

Select Portfolio Servicing 42,526 23,552 1 1 N/A 1,821 959

Wells Fargo Bank, NA8 246,738 118,689 12,658 8,459 9,222 9,039 5,238

Other Servicers 359,596 205,697 1,440 1,196 1,682 1,935 1,260

Total 1,735,457 883,076 53,323 33,376 50,434 34,605 20,701
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

Length of Trial Upon Conversion1

1 For all permanent modifications started. Note: Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010 all trials must be started using verified income. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers 

initiated trials using stated income information. 

3.0

3.4

3.5 3.3

4.6

3.0 3.0

3.6

3.2 3.5 3.3 3.3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Am. Home Servicing Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC JP Morgan Chase Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo Other GSE servicers Other SPA Servicers

Months

Trials Started Before 6/1/10 Trials Started On/After 6/1/10 Before 6/1/10 Average (5.3) On/After 6/1/10 Average (3.5)

The average length of the trial period for those converted to a permanent 

HAMP modification has decreased from 5.3 months for trials started prior to 

June 1, 2010, to 3.5 months for trials started June 1, 2010 or later.

11
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

88%

79%

82% 84%

77% 76%

81%

79%

90% 88%

83% 84%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo Other GSE

Servicers

Other SPA 

Servicers

Conversion Rate

Average of Trials Started Before 6/1/10 (42%) Average of Trials Started On/After 6/1/10 (82%)

Of Trials Started Before 6/1/10:

42% Converted to Permanent Modification

0.3% Pending Processing or Decision

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

82% Converted to Permanent Modification

8.5% Pending Processing or Decision

Conversion Rate1

1 Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010 all trials must be started using verified income. Before June 1, 2010, some servicers initiated trials using stated income information. 

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

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

population.

Following the implementation of verified income 

documentation in June 2010, rates of converting trial 

modifications into permanent modifications have risen 

substantially.

12
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Seconds

Program to date, there have been 1,282,914 calls to the Homeowner’s 

HOPETM Hotline regarding a specific SPA servicer, of which 6.7% included 

complaints. Below shows specific complaint rates.

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records.

Note: Complaint rate is the share of a specific servicer’s call volume that are complaints (e.g., for all calls about OneWest, 9.8% included 

complaints.)

Homeowner Experience (10 Largest Servicers)

Average Speed to Answer Homeowner Calls (September)

Average Speed to Answer Calls to 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline for 

September: 4 Seconds

Call Abandon Rate (September)

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Average Call 

Abandon Rate for September: 1.1%

Source: Survey data through September 30, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines; 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. 

Source: Survey data through September 30, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines; 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. 

Servicer Time to Resolve Third-Party Escalations 

(Cases Reported Feb. 1, 2011 – Oct. 31, 2011)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Resolved

Cases 614 8,844 1,001 571 3,675 292 716 793 149 2,319

Post-2/1/11 Calendar Days

Target: 30 Calendar Days

Source: MHA Support Centers. GSE and Non-GSE escalations resolved on or after Feb. 1, 2011. Investor 

denial cases, cases involving bankruptcy and those that did not require servicer actions are not included in 

calculation of servicer time to resolve escalations. Target of 30 calendar days, effective Feb. 1, 2011, 

includes an estimated 5 days of processing by MHA Support Centers. 

Servicer Complaint Rate to Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

(Program to Date, Through October)

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

11%

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JPMorgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

% of Calls for Specific 

Servicer

Complaints

(PTD): 2,489 29,864 6,810 3,377 17,260 1,709 2,530 274 667 11,032

Program to Date Average: 6.7%

13
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

Disposition Path 

Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through September 2011 (10 Largest Servicers)

Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled Who Are in the Process of:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy 

in Process

Borrower

Current

Alternative 

Modification

Payment 

Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-inLieuForeclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions

Total

(As of 

September 

2011)

American Home 

Mortgage Servicing Inc. 202 73 182 2,572 49 274 311 666 125 4,454

Bank of America, NA3 25,785 8,533 29,809 76,324 2,532 4,325 17,682 32,868 18,101 215,959

CitiMortgage Inc. 16,774 3,639 5,532 28,823 988 1,448 1,730 9,425 2,047 70,406

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 1,763 387 1,024 5,663 164 493 1,078 1,748 1,766 14,086

JPMorgan Chase Bank 

NA4 6,654 763 4,405 53,794 560 7,082 7,684 23,266 12,970 117,178

Litton Loan Servicing 

LP5 554 218 606 12,157 64 194 1,189 628 1,013 16,623

Ocwen Loan Servicing, 

LLC 634 132 458 2,998 465 38 367 2,053 641 7,786

OneWest Bank 435 601 727 10,302 153 56 1,150 3,211 3,937 20,572

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 1,187 410 1,323 5,466 315 415 1,321 1,697 3,380 15,514

Wells Fargo Bank NA6 2,134 803 12,128 54,594 1,031 19,474 3,047 16,196 8,843 118,250

TOTAL 

(These 10 Largest

Servicers)

56,122

9.3%

15,559

2.6%

56,194

9.4%

252,693

42.1%

6,321

1.1%

33,799

5.6%

35,559

5.9%

91,758

15.3%

52,823

8.8%

600,828

100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through September 30, 2011. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Trial loans that have been canceled, but no further action has yet been taken. 2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. 

3 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 4 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.

5 Due to the acquisition of Litton Loan Servicing LP (Litton) by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (Ocwen), Litton’s portfolio is being transferred to Ocwen. As a result, Litton’s August survey results for the estimated 

eligible 60+ Day Delinquent Borrowers are used in this month’s report. In the future, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Litton Loan Servicing LP will be reported on a consolidated basis. 6 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

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

The most common causes of 

trial cancellations from all 

servicers are:

• Insufficient documentation

• Trial plan payment default 

• Ineligible borrower: 

first lien housing expense is 

already below 31% of 

household income

14
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

Disposition Path 

Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through September 2011 (10 Largest Servicers)

Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification Who Are in the Process of:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy 

in Process

Borrower

Current

Alternative 

Modification

Payment 

Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-inLieuForeclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions

Total

(As of 

September 

2011)

American Home 

Mortgage Servicing Inc. 1,897 1,310 10,986 37,639 1,250 2,281 2,195 8,147 1,370 67,075

Bank of America, NA3 56,346 17,371 114,006 98,321 10,138 8,912 40,225 90,440 40,506 476,265

CitiMortgage Inc. 22,904 9,504 20,208 24,294 4,430 16,107 1,383 6,954 7,641 113,425

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 24,274 5,746 35,644 36,906 2,319 4,619 8,624 16,577 14,188 148,897

JPMorgan Chase Bank 

NA4 85,607 6,158 81,194 138,231 2,284 65,906 28,660 73,684 24,593 506,317

Litton Loan Servicing 

LP5 2,995 1,256 4,057 16,407 282 857 4,537 2,860 4,438 37,689

Ocwen Loan Servicing, 

LLC 6,396 1,494 30,805 33,004 4,792 135 426 4,537 2,190 83,779

OneWest Bank 5,314 3,039 24,718 19,690 1,471 1,578 4,543 11,856 10,502 82,711

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 2,599 437 3,011 4,599 378 309 1,191 1,881 1,839 16,244

Wells Fargo Bank NA6 17,314 5,131 51,033 50,726 1,866 26,613 15,704 22,218 15,122 205,727

TOTAL 

(These 10 Largest 

Servicers)

225,646

13.0%

51,446

3.0%

375,662

21.6%

459,817

26.5%

29,210

1.7%

127,317

7.3%

107,488

6.2%

239,154

13.8%

122,389

7.0%

1,738,129

100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through September 30, 2011. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, but no further action has yet been taken. 2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. 

3 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 4 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation.

5 Due to the acquisition of Litton Loan Servicing LP (Litton) by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (Ocwen), Litton’s portfolio is being transferred to Ocwen. As a result, Litton’s August survey results for the estimated eligible 

60+ Day Delinquent Borrowers are used in this month’s report. In the future, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Litton Loan Servicing LP will be reported on a consolidated basis. 6 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios. 

The most common causes of 

trials not accepted from all 

servicers are:

• Insufficient documentation

• Ineligible borrower: 

first lien housing expense is 

already below 31% of 

household income

• Ineligible mortgage

15
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

Background

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

of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage 

servicers. Treasury has been publicly reporting information about servicer 

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

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

which reflects how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible 

homeowners and report program activity. 

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

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

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

mortgage modifications were even occurring. Treasury sought to get 

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

implement a national mortgage modification program. 

Through ongoing compliance reviews, Treasury has required participating 

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

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

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

each of the 10 largest servicers participating in MHA. Not only will the 

assessments provide more transparency to the public about servicer 

performance in the program, but the assessments are also intended to 

encourage servicers to correct identified instances of non-compliance. 

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

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

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

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

actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such 

remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of 

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

financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to 

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

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

every successful permanent modification under the Home Affordable 

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

transactions pursuant to the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative 

Program.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

servicing operation.

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

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

providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing 

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

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

standards that have improved mortgage modifications across the industry, 

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

struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how 

mortgage modifications should be designed so that they are sustainable, 

standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as 

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

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

simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification while proceeding 

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

the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist 

homeowners.

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

consequences for servicers needing improvement.

(Continued on next page)

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. MHAC tests and evaluates a range of servicer activities for compliance with MHA 

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

the servicers and identifies areas that need remediation. Each compliance 

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

and Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and 

Program Management, Reporting and Governance. The compliance results 

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

The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested by MHA-C 

that had significant impact on homeowners and include for those highlighted 

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

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

required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs substantial 

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

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

servicer needs moderate improvement in its performance of that activity. 

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

particular activity, but the servicer may nonetheless need minor improvement 

in its performance of that activity.

Although the compliance reviews emphasize objective measurements and 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

particular activity. 

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

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

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

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

eligible homeowners under MHA guidelines and report program data. 

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

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

against the “best” and “worst” performing servicer of the 10 largest servicers 

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

each of those servicers compares in specific areas under MHA. 

The Determination Process: Results of the Data

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

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

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

improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial 

improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its 

performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the 

significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments, 

Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 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 39 for a description of each of the 

compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more 

information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov. 17
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

3rd Quarter 2011 Servicer Assessment Results

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

Improvement Needed Servicer Name

Substantial JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Moderate

American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

Bank of America, NA

CitiMortgage, Inc.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Litton Loan Servicing, LP1

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Minor

OneWest Bank

Select Portfolio Servicing

18

After evaluating the Third Quarter 2011 MHA Servicer Assessments, Treasury will continue to withhold servicer incentives owed to JPMorgan Chase 

Bank, NA, which requires substantial improvement due to their lack of progress in implementing previously identified improvements.

With the exception of Bank of America, NA, Treasury is not withholding servicer incentives for servicers requiring moderate improvement for this 

quarter. However, those servicers that fail to improve in those areas identified may be subject to servicer incentive withholding in the future, and 

Treasury will continue to withhold servicer incentives from Bank of America, NA, until it makes additional improvements.

Two servicers have been identified as needing minor improvement for this quarter.

Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the Third Quarter 2011 servicer assessment results.

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

Compliance Results

19

American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. 

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 6.8% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

After considering all relevant factors, American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. servicer incentives 

will not be withheld at this time.

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

20

American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. 

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1 Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

35%

8%

2%

34%

19%

1%

29%

27%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

86%

90%

62%

85%

88%

54%

78%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

28

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.2%

0.0%

3.4%

0.4%

0.0%

3.9%

0.6%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

21

Bank of America, NA

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.0% 



< 10% 1.5% 



 - 



< 5% 6.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.1% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Bank of America, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, NA servicer incentives will 

continue to be withheld at this time.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

22

Bank of America, NA

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

35%

2%

34%

26%

1%

29%

22%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

76%

90%

62%

62%

88%

54%

54%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

32

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

3.6%

0.0%

3.4%

3.4%

0.0%

3.9%

3.9%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

23

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.5% 



< 10% 0.5% 



 - 



< 5% 6.0% 



 - 



< 5% 8.4% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors,CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will not 

be withheld at this time.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

24

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

35%

2%

34%

34%

1%

29%

29%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

81%

90%

62%

75%

88%

54%

73%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

28

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

2.3%

0.0%

3.4%

0.9%

0.0%

3.9%

1.0%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

25

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 4.2% 1



 - 



< 5% 2.9% 1



 - 

1 - Rating carried forward from prior quarter.

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors, GMAC Mortgage, LLC servicer incentives will 

not be withheld at this time.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

26

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

2%

2%

34%

1%

1%

29%

2%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

84%

90%

62%

80%

88%

54%

79%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

12

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.1%

0.0%

3.4%

0.1%

0.0%

3.9%

1.4%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

27

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.9% 



 - 



< 5% 6.0% 



 - 



< 5% 5.7% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA has areas requiring substantial improvement due to their 

lack of progress in implementing previously identified improvements.

After considering all relevant factors, JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA servicer incentives 

will continue to be withheld at this time.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

28

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

23%

2%

34%

17%

1%

29%

9%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

72%

90%

62%

66%

88%

54%

57%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

39

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.2%

0.0%

3.4%

0.5%

0.0%

3.9%

0.7%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

29

Litton Loan Servicing, LP

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

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.0% 



< 10% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.9% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Litton Loan Servicing, LP has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors,Litton Loan Servicing, LP servicer incentives will 

not be withheld at this time.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

30

Litton Loan Servicing, LP

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

18%

2%

34%

10%

1%

29%

11%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

81%

90%

62%

72%

88%

54%

74%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

18

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.7%

0.0%

3.4%

0.6%

0.0%

3.9%

0.2%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

31

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 2.4% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.3% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

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.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

32

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

13%

2%

34%

18%

1%

29%

20%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

82%

90%

62%

79%

88%

54%

76%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

11

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.5%

0.0%

3.4%

0.5%

0.0%

3.9%

0.4%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

33

OneWest Bank

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 1



 - 



< 5% 1.8% 1



 - 

1 - Rating carried forward from prior quarter.

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

34

OneWest Bank

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

5%

2%

34%

6%

1%

29%

14%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

77%

90%

62%

79%

88%

54%

67%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

19

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.0%

0.0%

3.4%

0.0%

0.0%

3.9%

0.3%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

35

Select Portfolio Servicing

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.8% 



< 10% 0.8% 



 - 



< 5% 3.2% 



 - 



< 5% 2.3% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

36

Select Portfolio Servicing

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

5%

2%

34%

5%

1%

29%

10%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

90%

90%

62%

88%

88%

54%

84%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

9

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.1%

0.0%

3.4%

0.0%

0.0%

3.9%

0.0%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

37

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.4% 



< 10% 1.3% 



 - 



< 5% 5.5% 



 - 



< 5% 1.9% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Wells Fargo Bank, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors,Wells Fargo Bank, NA servicer incentives will 

not be withheld at this time.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

Third Quarter 2011

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data 

discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

38

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35%

12%

2%

34%

11%

1%

29%

11%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

72%

88%

90%

62%

84%

88%

54%

75%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

39

25

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.6%

0.5%

0.0%

3.4%

0.3%

0.0%

3.9%

1.3%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

March 2011

June 2011

Sep. 2011

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases1

Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest 10 servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1The population in Q3 2011 only includes non-GSE cases resolved after 2/1/2011.
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Appendix

Metrics Descriptions

Compliance Metrics (quantitative)

Second Look % Disagree: Second Look is a process in 

which MHA-C reviews loans not in a permanent 

modification, to assess the accuracy of the servicer’s 

determination of whether the homeowner is eligible 

for a modification. This metric measures the 

percentage of loans reviewed in Second Look with 

which MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s 

determination. 

Second Look % Unable to Determine: This metric 

measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second 

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

on the documentation provided, how the servicer 

reached its loan-modification decision. 

For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to 

Determine results, remedial actions Treasury requires 

servicers to take include, but are not limited to: 

reevaluating loans not offered HAMP modifications, 

submitting additional documentation to support the 

initial reason for denial of the modification, clarifying 

loan status, and engaging in systemic process 

remediation. For such results, servicers are also 

reminded of their obligation to suspend foreclosure of 

the loan until the unresolved items are remediated. 

Income Calculation Errors: Correctly calculating 

homeowner monthly income is a critical component 

of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as 

establishing an accurate modification payment. This 

metric measures how often MHA-C disagrees with a 

servicer’s calculation of a borrower’s Monthly Gross 

Income, allowing for up to a 5% differential from 

MHA-C’s calculations. For Income Calculation Error 

results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers 

to take include, but are not limited to: correcting 

income errors exceeding the 5% differential, requiring 

the servicer to review their own income calculation 

accuracy, enhancing policies and procedures, and 

conducting staff training on income calculation.

Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury pays 

incentives to servicers, investors, and homeowners 

for permanent modifications completed under MHA. 

Although intended for different recipients, all 

incentives are paid through the servicer. Data that 

servicers upload to the program system of record is 

used to calculate the incentives paid to servicers, 

investors, and homeowners. This metric measures 

how data anomalies between servicer loan files and 

the reported information affect incentive payments. 

For Incentive Payment Data Error results, remedial 

actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, 

but are not limited to: correcting the identified errors 

and correcting system and operational processes such 

that accurate data is mapped to its appropriate places 

in the program system of record. 

Compliance Metrics (qualitative)

Servicers establish processes and internal controls to 

help ensure their compliance with Program guidance. 

For each of the performance categories, Treasury 

performs a qualitative assessment of those internal 

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

assessment evaluates the nature, scope, and 

potential or actual impact on homeowners resulting 

from instances of servicer non-compliance with its 

own internal controls. For ineffective internal 

controls, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers 

to take include, but are not limited to: identifying and 

reevaluating any affected loans, enhancing the 

effectiveness of internal controls, and conducting 

staff training on servicer procedures. 

Program Metrics

Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the 

rate of conversion to permanent modification for 

trials started on or after June 1, 2010, when all 

servicers were required to verify income 

documentation at trial start. Conversion rate is 

measured against all trials eligible to convert – those 

three months in trial, or four months if the borrower 

was at risk of imminent default at trial modification 

start. Permanent modifications transferred among 

servicers are credited to the originating servicer; trial 

modifications transferred are reflected in the current 

servicer’s population. 

Aged Trials as % of Active Trials: This monthly metric 

measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share 

of all active trials. These figures include trial 

modifications that have been converted to 

permanent modifications by the servicer and are 

pending reporting to the program system of record, 

plus some portion which may be canceled. 

Days to Resolve Escalated Cases: This cumulative 

metric measures servicer response time for 

homeowner inquiries escalated to MHA Support 

Centers. Effective Feb. 1, 2011, a target of 30 

calendar days was established for non-GSE escalation 

cases, including an estimated 5 days processing by the 

MHA Support Centers. The methodology for 

calculating average days to respond to escalated 

cases was recently updated and the Q3 2011 figures 

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

Investor denial cases, cases involving bankruptcy, and 

those cases that did not require servicer actions are 

not included in the calculation of servicer time to 

resolve escalations.

% of Missing Modification Status Reports: This 

monthly metric measures the servicer’s ability to 

promptly report on modification status. Inconsistent 

and untimely reporting of modification status reports 

may impact incentive compensation and loan 

performance analysis.

For more information on the assessments, please 

visit: www.FinancialStability.gov.

39
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

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.

American Eagle Federal Credit Union

American Home Mortgage Servicing, 

Inc

AMS Servicing, LLC

Aurora Loan Services, LLC

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bank United

Bay Federal Credit Union

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

Community Credit Union of Florida

CUC Mortgage Corporation

DuPage Credit Union

Fay Servicing, LLC

Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank

First Bank

First Financial Bank, N.A.

Franklin Credit Management 

Corporation

Franklin Savings

Fresno County Federal Credit Union

Glass City Federal Credit Union

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Grafton Suburban Credit Union

Great Lakes Credit Union

Greater Nevada Mortgage Services

Green Tree Servicing LLC

Hartford Savings Bank

Hillsdale County National Bank

HomEq Servicing

HomeStar Bank & Financial Services

Horicon Bank

Horizon Bank, NA

IBM Southeast Employees' Federal 

Credit Union

IC Federal Credit Union

Idaho Housing and Finance Association

iServe Residential Lending LLC

iServe Servicing Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2

Lake City Bank

Lake National Bank

Liberty Bank and Trust Co. 

Litton Loan Servicing

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, LLC

OneWest Bank

ORNL Federal Credit Union

Park View Federal Savings Bank

Pathfinder Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage3

Purdue Employees Federal Credit 

Union

QLending, Inc.

Quantum Servicing Corporation

Residential Credit Solutions

RG Mortgage Corporation

RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing 

Corporation

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.

Schools Financial Credit Union

SEFCU

Select Portfolio Servicing

Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial 

Services, Inc.

ShoreBank

Silver State Schools Credit Union

Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC

Sterling Savings Bank

Suburban Mortgage Company of New 

Mexico

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, NA4

Yadkin Valley Bank

1 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home 

Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC 

Mortgage Corporation. 

3 Formerly National City Bank.

4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia 

Mortgage, FSB. 

Appendix A1: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP

40
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2011

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)

Bank of America, NA1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Community Credit Union of Florida

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2

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, NA 4

FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP)

Amarillo National Bank

American Financial Resources Inc. 

Aurora Financial Group, Inc. 

Aurora Loan Services, LLC 

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico 

Bank of America, NA1

Capital International Financial, Inc. 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

CU Mortgage Services, Inc. 

First Federal Bank of Florida 

First Mortgage Corporation 

Franklin Savings 

Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

Guaranty Bank 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

James B. Nutter & Company 

JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA2

M&T Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Marsh Associates, Inc. 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC 

PNC Mortgage 3

RBC Bank (USA) 

Residential Credit Solutions 

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 

Schmidt Mortgage Company 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

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

Stockman Bank of Montana 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

Weststar Mortgage, Inc. 

FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP)

Bank of America, NA1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

Green Tree Servicing LLC

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

PNC Bank, National Association 

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

Rural Housing Service Modification Program 

(RD-HAMP)

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico

Bank of America, N.A. 1

Horicon Bank 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA 2

Magna Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

1 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing 

LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage 

Corporation. 

3 Formerly National City Bank.

4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage FSB. 

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs

41