Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Report Highlights Inside:

Number of Permanent Modifications Exceeds 790,000

• Seventy-five percent of eligible homeowners entering a HAMP trial modification 

since June 1, 2010 received a permanent modification, with an average trial period 

of 3.5 months. 

• Homeowners in active first lien permanent modifications save a median of $525 

each month, or 37% of the median before-modification payment. Program to date, 

homeowners in permanent modifications have realized aggregate savings in 

monthly mortgage payments of nearly $7.8 billion. 

This Month: Servicer Assessment Results

• The Obama Administration continues its commitment to transparency with the 

release of the second installment of quarterly Servicer Assessments.

• For the second quarter of 2011, two servicers have been determined to need 

substantial improvement. These servicers were also in need of substantial 

improvement in the first quarter, and their servicer incentives will continue to be 

withheld.

• Three servicers met the established benchmarks for program compliance, 

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

second quarter. Five servicers were found to need moderate improvement. 

SUMMARY RESULTS:

First Lien Modification Activity

First Lien Modification Characteristics/

Treasury-FHA HAMP Activity

Activity for HAFA, PRA and UP

Second Lien Modification Activity

HAMP Activity by State

HAMP Activity by MSA/

Homeowner Outreach

Aged Trials

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

SERVICER RESULTS:

Modification Activity by Servicer

Trial Length

Conversion Rate

Disposition of Homeowners Not in

HAMP

Homeowner Experience

Modifications by Investor Type

9

10

11

12-13

14

15

APPENDICES:

Participants in MHA Programs 40-41

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:

Overview

Servicer Results

Description of Metrics

16-18

19-38

39
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

HAMP Activity: First Lien Modifications

Total

HAMP Eligibility 

(As of June 30, 2011)

Eligible Delinquent Loans1 2,566,583

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2 1,023,106

Trial

Modifications

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3 1,892,006

All Trials Started 1,661,461

Trials Reported Since June 2011 Report4 22,079

Trial Modifications Canceled (Cumulative) 763,984

Active Trials 106,078

Permanent 

Modifications

All Permanent Modifications Started 791,399

Permanent Modifications Reported Since 

June 2011 Report 28,328

Permanent Modifications Canceled 

(Cumulative)5 115,952

Active Permanent Modifications 675,447

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of June 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 weekly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through July 28, 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 

1,796 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

955

1,050

1,138

1,208

1,257 1,283 1,305 1,330 1,353 1,384 1,415 1,446 1,481 1,511

1,544 1,576 1,605 1,627 1,647 1,661

0

100

200

300

600

900

1,200

1,500

1,800

Dec 2009 Mar 2010 June Sep Dec Mar 2011 June

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, 22,079 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; of those, 14,419 were 

trials with a first payment recorded in July 2011. 

Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

67

117

170

231

299

347

398

435

468

496

520

550

580

608 634

670

699

731

763 791

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Dec 2009 Mar 2010 June Sep Dec Mar 2011 June

All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

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

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active 

permanent modifications are:

• 61.4% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or 

unemployment)

• 11.2% reported excessive obligation

• 2.9% 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% -14.2 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2 78.4% 61.6% -14.7 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing 

Payment3 $1,427.90 $832.24 -$524.96

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 $7.8 billion, program to date, compared 

with unmodified mortgage obligations.

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active 

permanent first lien modifications is $524.96, or 37% of 

the median monthly payment before modification. 

• Active permanent modifications feature the following 

modification steps:

• 99.0% feature interest rate reductions1

• 59.5% offer term extension

• 30.7% include principal forbearance

The Treasury FHA-HAMP Program provides assistance to eligible homeowners 

with FHA-insured mortgages.

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started 5,721

Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 4,072

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity

1 Effective July 2011, the methodology for reporting interest rate reduction has been updated.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through July 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 21% of HAFA agreements started, the 

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

or was disqualified from HAMP. 

4

All HAFA Agreements Started1 25,716

HAFA Agreements Active 10,428

HAFA Transactions Completed 12,888

Completed Transactions – Short Sale 12,514

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu 374

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity HAFA Activity by Servicer

Servicer

Agreements

Started1

Agreements 

Completed

Bank of America, NA2 2,824 1,873

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank NA3 10,191 4,621

Litton Loan Servicing LP 1,218 581

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. 1,417 674

Wells Fargo Bank, NA4 7,002 3,609

All Other Servicers 3,064 1,530

Total 25,716 12,888

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

2 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit 

Corporation.

3 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.

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

The Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) requires servicers of non-GSE loans to 

evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for mortgages with a loan-to-value 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 

reduce principal as part of the modification. PRA may be a feature of a HAMP trial or 

permanent modification. 

All PRA Trial Modifications Started 29,406

PRA Trial Modifications Active 18,404

All PRA Permanent Modifications Started 9,355

PRA Permanent Modifications Active 9,221

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent 

Modifications $67,735

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent 

Modifications (%)2 30.4%

Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) Activity

2 PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization. 

The Treasury Unemployment Program (UP) provides a temporary 

forbearance to homeowners who are unemployed. Treasury recently 

announced that unemployed homeowners must be considered for a 

minimum of 12 months’ forbearance. 

All UP Forbearance Plans Started (Through June 2011) 13,521

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 10,881

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 2,640

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 June 30, 2011. 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

5

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 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 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 37,466

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien 

Extinguishments 3,516

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2 422

Active Second Lien Modifications 33,528

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity 

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

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

which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

2 Includes 54 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.

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

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:

Second Lien Partially Extinguished 1,356

Second Lien Loan Modifications3 32,172

Second Lien Modification Activity by Servicer

Servicer

Second Lien 

Modifications 

Started Full Ext. DQ1

Active Partial Ext./

Terms Modified

Bank of America, NA2 15,708 1,377 189 14,142

CitiMortgage, Inc 5,592 1,349 32 4,211

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 1,991 297 1 1,693

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank 

NA3 4,751 0 80 4,671

Wells Fargo Bank, NA4 7,882 216 111 7,555

Other SPA Servicers 1,542 277 9 1,256

Total 37,466 3,516 422 33,528

Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)

673 992 1,453 2,121

3,981 5,610

9,589

21,277

24,937

28,373

32,404

35,439

37,466

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

Aug 

2010

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 

2011

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Average Amount of Full Extinguishment $67,251

Average Amount of Partial Extinguishment $6,362

Note: Number of modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections. 1 Includes second liens paid off.

2 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit 

Corporation.

3 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.

4 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. 

Note: Includes second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for 

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

which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

6

Note: Includes active trial and permanent 

modifications from the official HAMP system of 

record.

Source: 2nd 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 62 283 345 0.0% MT 123 771 894 0.1%

AL 618 3,871 4,489 0.6% NC 1,841 12,254 14,095 1.8%

AR 243 1,442 1,685 0.2% ND 18 113 131 0.0%

AZ 3,606 30,692 34,298 4.4% NE 129 940 1,069 0.1%

CA 25,954 164,051 190,005 24.3% NH 470 3,120 3,590 0.5%

CO 1,274 9,364 10,638 1.4% NJ 3,464 21,781 25,245 3.2%

CT 1,299 8,452 9,751 1.2% NM 394 2,186 2,580 0.3%

DC 163 1,145 1,308 0.2% NV 2,532 17,180 19,712 2.5%

DE 312 2,096 2,408 0.3% NY 5,436 31,089 36,525 4.7%

FL 13,994 79,995 93,989 12.0% OH 2,391 14,873 17,264 2.2%

GA 3,952 24,491 28,443 3.6% OK 268 1,556 1,824 0.2%

HI 409 2,580 2,989 0.4% OR 1,112 7,371 8,483 1.1%

IA 265 1,724 1,989 0.3% PA 2,227 14,014 16,241 2.1%

ID 405 2,585 2,990 0.4% RI 496 3,568 4,064 0.5%

IL 5,548 36,144 41,692 5.3% SC 985 6,343 7,328 0.9%

IN 1,059 6,520 7,579 1.0% SD 27 263 290 0.0%

KS 252 1,623 1,875 0.2% TN 1,164 6,938 8,102 1.0%

KY 427 2,548 2,975 0.4% TX 3,058 17,660 20,718 2.7%

LA 698 3,660 4,358 0.6% UT 893 6,395 7,288 0.9%

MA 2,355 16,894 19,249 2.5% VA 2,173 16,430 18,603 2.4%

MD 3,162 21,651 24,813 3.2% VT 103 573 676 0.1%

ME 325 1,853 2,178 0.3% WA 2,254 13,444 15,698 2.0%

MI 3,330 21,853 25,183 3.2% WI 1,026 6,573 7,599 1.0%

MN 1,445 11,706 13,151 1.7% WV 131 993 1,124 0.1%

MO 1,163 6,977 8,140 1.0% WY 52 348 400 0.1%

MS 390 2,552 2,942 0.4% Other2 601 1,919 2,520 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 July 2011

Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by 

Treasury and Partners (cumulative) 57

Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events 

(cumulative) 57,578

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1 7,700,371

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov

(July 2011) 1,727,953

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative) 122,913,503

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 July

Total Number of Calls Taken at 

1-888-995-HOPE 2,402,011 70,835

Borrowers Receiving Free Housing 

Counseling Assistance Through the 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

1,142,754 29,405

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures

Call Center Volume

Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline.

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 7,941 48,711 56,652 7.2%

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA 6,950 42,007 48,957 6.3%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, 

CA 5,025 35,355 40,380 5.2%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 5,362 35,002 40,364 5.2%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano 

Beach, FL 5,993 32,510 38,503 4.9%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 2,797 25,059 27,856 3.6%

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, 

DC-VA-MD-WV 3,047 23,170 26,217 3.4%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 3,141 19,754 22,895 2.9%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 2,105 14,113 16,218 2.1%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 2,394 13,133 15,527 2.0%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 2,045 13,232 15,277 2.0%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA 2,067 12,485 14,552 1.9%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 1,683 12,126 13,809 1.8%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,796 11,775 13,571 1.7%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, 

CA 1,802 11,490 13,292 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 July 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

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

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 by the servicer and are pending reporting to the HAMP system of record plus some portion which may be 

canceled. 

The number of active trials lasting 6 months or longer has remained near 23,000.

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 July 2011

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers as reported by 

servicers as of June 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 weekly servicer survey of large SPA servicers 

through July 28, 2011. 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. 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 by the servicer and are pending reporting 

to the HAMP system of record plus some portion which may be 

canceled. 5 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home 

Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit 

Corporation. 6 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation. 7 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under 

Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. 8 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 A. 9 Includes servicers of loans owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and 

Freddie Mac. Includes GSE loans transferred from SPA servicers.

As of 

June 30, 2011 Cumulative As of July 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 

June 2011

Report3

Active Trial 

Modifications3

Active Trial 

Modifications 

Lasting 6

Months or 

Longer4

Active 

Permanent 

Modifications3

American Home Mortgage Servicing 

Inc. 40,035 37,788 34,296 27,040 708 2,597 378 22,984

Bank of America, NA5 251,997 511,184 406,537 155,317 5,286 31,815 9,950 132,763

CitiMortgage, Inc. 74,560 182,010 131,003 53,761 656 5,166 2,053 47,048

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 27,649 76,003 62,897 45,519 778 3,202 56 38,559

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA6 163,514 320,747 261,188 113,125 4,628 19,742 3,974 92,932

Litton Loan Servicing LP 33,689 43,081 37,868 12,040 279 2,539 315 9,582

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 38,198 49,162 46,539 35,818 1,088 3,029 513 27,821

OneWest Bank 33,962 71,129 54,527 29,643 858 4,177 222 26,309

Select Portfolio Servicing 4,750 68,154 42,132 22,796 185 845 45 18,928

Wells Fargo Bank, NA7 127,686 323,086 236,869 107,059 2,203 11,487 1,265 93,917

Other SPA Servicers8 94,515 209,662 214,425 107,818 3,118 9,901 1,351 93,265

Other GSE Servicers9 132,551 NA 133,180 81,463 2,292 11,578 2,939 71,339

Total 1,023,106 1,892,006 1,661,461 791,399 22,079 106,078 23,061 675,447

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer

9
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through July 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

3.3 3.5 3.3

4.6

3.0 3.0

3.7

3.2

3.5 3.3 3.2

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.

10
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

86%

64%

76%

80%

68%

64%

80% 78%

88%

85%

79% 81%

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 (75%)

Of Trials Started Before 6/1/10:

42% Converted to Permanent Modification

0.4% Pending Processing or Decision

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

75% Converted to Permanent Modification

15% Pending Processing or Decision

Conversion Rate1

1 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. 

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 

substantially risen.

11
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Disposition Path 

Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through June 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 June 

2011)

American Home 

Mortgage Servicing Inc. 289 69 190 2,571 37 163 277 659 105 4,360

Bank of America, NA3 39,394 7,995 29,621 70,679 2,005 3,791 15,865 30,767 13,078 213,195

CitiMortgage Inc. 16,829 3,651 5,549 28,915 990 1,452 1,736 9,456 2,053 70,631

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 1,689 401 1,077 5,855 178 435 962 1,715 1,551 13,863

JP Morgan Chase Bank 

NA4 7,181 797 4,405 55,533 477 5,735 7,006 24,067 11,760 116,961

Litton Loan Servicing LP 1,503 588 1,849 13,374 228 173 1,374 1,486 923 21,498

Ocwen Loan Servicing, 

LLC 441 126 438 2,871 444 37 351 1,963 614 7,285

OneWest Bank 415 694 683 10,322 279 40 1,133 3,575 3,542 20,683

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 1,345 500 1,407 5,449 358 375 1,340 1,847 3,013 15,634

Wells Fargo Bank NA5 1,483 787 12,953 56,524 1,364 14,659 3,392 16,378 10,669 118,209

TOTAL 

(These 10 Largest

Servicers)

70,569

11.7%

15,608

2.6%

58,172

9.7%

252,093

41.9%

6,360

1.1%

26,860

4.5%

33,436

5.6%

91,913

15.3%

47,308

7.9%

602,319

100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through June 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 Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 4 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.

5 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

12
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Disposition Path 

Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through June 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 June 

2011)

American Home 

Mortgage Servicing Inc. 1,876 1,135 9,270 33,174 950 1,206 1,859 7,313 1,184 57,967

Bank of America, NA3 72,245 13,184 121,456 75,627 6,638 6,375 31,003 67,197 26,255 419,980

CitiMortgage Inc. 22,704 8,771 21,087 25,839 5,003 14,663 1,679 7,020 6,780 113,546

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 22,516 5,648 34,467 35,739 2,726 3,629 7,534 15,984 12,299 140,542

JP Morgan Chase Bank 

NA4 86,982 5,998 86,448 128,320 1,962 54,068 24,763 68,627 19,948 477,116

Litton Loan Servicing LP 7,271 3,120 10,959 19,928 907 775 4,861 6,528 4,157 58,506

Ocwen Loan Servicing, 

LLC 5,753 1,345 27,726 29,705 4,313 121 384 4,084 1,971 75,402

OneWest Bank 5,056 3,193 24,737 15,554 1,870 1,269 4,050 12,930 9,159 77,818

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 2,647 413 2,915 4,059 404 242 982 1,856 1,453 14,971

Wells Fargo Bank NA5 16,787 4,166 54,385 42,908 2,404 18,378 14,601 23,319 14,251 191,199

TOTAL 

(These 10 Largest 

Servicers)

243,837

15.0%

46,973

2.9%

393,450

24.2%

410,853

25.3%

27,177

1.7%

100,726

6.2%

91,716

5.6%

214,858

13.2%

97,457

6.0%

1,627,047

100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through June 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 Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 4 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes EMC Mortgage Corporation.

5 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

13
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Program to date, there have been 1,182,753 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.

Note: Complaint rate is the share of a specific servicer’s call volume that are complaints (e.g., for all calls about OneWest, 10.2% 

included complaints.)

Homeowner Experience (10 Largest Servicers)

Average Speed to Answer Homeowner Calls (June)

-

10.0 

20.0 

30.0 

40.0 

50.0 

60.0 

70.0 

80.0 

90.0 

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JP Morgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Seconds

Average Speed to Answer 

Calls to Homeowner’s 

HOPETM Hotline for June: 

3.1 Seconds

Call Abandon Rate (June)

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JP Morgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline 

Average Call Abandon Rate 

for June: 0.9%

Source: Survey data through June 30, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines; Homeowner’s 

HOPETM Hotline.

Source: Survey data through June 30, 2011, from servicers on call volume to loss mitigation lines; Homeowner’s 

HOPETM Hotline.

Servicer Time to Resolve Third-Party Escalations 

(Program to Date, Through July)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JP Morgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Resolved: 526 7,042 1,281 882 3,900 612 662 945 212 3,216

Cases (PTD) Calendar Days

Target: 30 Calendar Days

Source: HAMP Solutions Center. Target of 30 calendar days, effective Feb. 1, 2011, includes an 

estimated 5 days of processing by HAMP Solutions Center. 

Servicer Complaint Rate to Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

(Program to Date, Through July)

Calls to 

Servicer: 

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

11%

Am. Home 

Servicing

Bank of 

America

CitiMortgage GMAC JP Morgan 

Chase

Litton Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

% of Calls for Specific 

Servicer

Complaints

(PTD): 2,231 27,371 6,405 3,139 15,902 1,621 2,244 249 628 10,214

Program to Date Average: 6.7% 

14
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through July 2011

Servicer GSE Private Portfolio

Total Active 

Modifications

American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. 1,288 24,292 1 25,581

Bank of America, NA1 96,093 58,803 9,682 164,578

CitiMortgage, Inc. 30,885 4,657 16,672 52,214

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 24,488 5,787 11,486 41,761

JP Morgan Chase NA2 52,586 40,520 19,568 112,674

Litton Loan Servicing LP 86 12,025 10 12,121

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 7,162 23,574 114 30,850

OneWest Bank 14,260 13,838 2,388 30,486

Select Portfolio Servicing 523 16,682 2,568 19,773

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 3 49,421 15,020 40,963 105,404

Other HAMP Servicers 136,331 34,027 15,725 186,083

Total 413,123 249,225 119,177 781,525

1 Bank of America, NA includes Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and 

Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes 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)

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 16 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 will 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

2nd 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 Bank of America, NA

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA

Moderate

American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Select Portfolio Servicing

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Minor

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Litton Loan Servicing, LP

OneWest Bank

18

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

two servicers requiring substantial improvement until those servicers make certain identified improvements.

For those servicers requiring moderate improvement, Treasury is not withholding servicer incentives for this quarter. However, those 

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

Three 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 Second Quarter 2011 servicer assessment results.
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% 0.7% 



< 10% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 5.3% 



 - 



< 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

Second 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

 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.

American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. has areas requiring moderate 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


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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

19%

1%

29%

27%

2%

49%

31%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

85%

88%

54%

78%

84%

26%

59%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

39

18

58

41

19

46

38

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

American Home

Mortgage

Servicing Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.4%

0.0%

3.9%

0.6%

0.0%

19.1%

0.1%

0.0%

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

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% 0.8% 



< 10% 8.2% 



 - 



< 5% 13.2% 



 - 



< 5% 7.2% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Second 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

 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, 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



Bank of America, NA has areas requiring substantial improvement.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

22

Bank of America, NA

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

26%

1%

29%

22%

2%

49%

28%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

62%

88%

54%

54%

84%

26%

26%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

58

18

58

58

19

46

46

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

3.4%

0.0%

3.9%

3.9%

0.0%

19.1%

19.1%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance
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% 0.5% 



< 10% 5.5% 



 - 1



< 5% 12.0% 



 - 



< 5% 3.1% 



 - 

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

Second 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

 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, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will not be withheld 

at this time.

CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate 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


MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

24

CitiMortgage, 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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

34%

1%

29%

29%

2%

49%

49%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

75%

88%

54%

73%

84%

26%

70%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

42

18

58

40

19

46

35

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.9%

0.0%

3.9%

1.0%

0.0%

19.1%

3.2%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance
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% 1.7% 



< 10% 0.7% 



 - 



< 5% 4.2% 



 - 



< 5% 2.9% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Second 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

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring minor improvement.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

26

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

1%

1%

29%

2%

2%

49%

2%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

80%

88%

54%

79%

84%

26%

78%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

29

18

58

29

19

46

24

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.1%

0.0%

3.9%

1.4%

0.0%

19.1%

1.7%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

27

J.P. Morgan 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% 1.2% 



< 10% 3.2% 



 - 



< 5% 20.6% 



 - 



< 5% 12.4% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Second 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

 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, J.P. Morgan 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



J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA has areas requiring substantial improvement.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

28

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

17%

1%

29%

9%

2%

49%

16%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

J.P. Morgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

66%

88%

54%

57%

84%

26%

40%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

J.P. Morgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

57

18

58

55

19

46

45

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

J.P. Morgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.5%

0.0%

3.9%

0.7%

0.0%

19.1%

0.3%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

J.P. Morgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

29

Litton Loan Servicing, LP

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% 3.3% 



< 10% 2.7% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.3% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Second 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

 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

Litton Loan Servicing, LP 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


MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

30

Litton Loan Servicing, LP

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

10%

1%

29%

11%

2%

49%

12%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

72%

88%

54%

74%

84%

26%

68%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

32

18

58

32

19

46

29

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.6%

0.0%

3.9%

0.2%

0.0%

19.1%

0.0%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Litton Loan

Servicing, LP

Best

Servicer

Performance
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% 2.7% 



< 10% 3.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 3.1% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

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



Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

 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

Second 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

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

18%

1%

29%

20%

2%

49%

30%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

79%

88%

54%

76%

84%

26%

77%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

54

18

58

55

19

46

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.5%

0.0%

3.9%

0.4%

0.0%

19.1%

0.5%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

N/A
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% 0.7% 



< 10% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.8% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Second 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

 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

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


MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

34

OneWest Bank

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

6%

1%

29%

14%

2%

49%

23%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

79%

88%

54%

67%

84%

26%

46%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

43

18

58

42

19

46

38

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.0%

0.0%

3.9%

0.3%

0.0%

19.1%

0.0%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance
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% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.3% 



 - 



< 5% 10.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.3% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Second 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

 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, Select Portfolio Servicing 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



Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring moderate improvement.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

36

Select Portfolio Servicing

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

5%

1%

29%

10%

2%

49%

10%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

88%

88%

54%

84%

84%

26%

77%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

18

18

58

19

19

46

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.0%

0.0%

3.9%

0.0%

0.0%

19.1%

0.1%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

N/A
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% 4.4% 



 - 



< 5% 8.0% 



 - 

Result

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, NA servicer incentives will not be withheld at this 

time, and previously withheld incentives will be released as areas requiring substantial improvement have 

been remediated. 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA has areas requiring moderate 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

Second 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

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. 

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 Cases Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

Results as of:

Dec. 2010

March 2011

June 2011

34%

11%

1%

29%

11%

2%

49%

14%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

62%

84%

88%

54%

75%

84%

26%

65%

78%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

58

35

18

58

35

19

46

31

24

0 20 40 60 80

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

3.4%

0.3%

0.0%

3.9%

1.3%

0.0%

19.1%

0.5%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance
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 program-todate metric measures servicer response time for 

homeowner inquiries escalated to the HAMP Solution 

Center. Effective Feb. 1, 2011, a target of 30 calendar 

days was established for non-GSE escalation cases, 

including an estimated 5 days processing by HAMP 

Solution Center. These figures include both GSE and 

non-GSE escalation results. The methodology for 

calculating average days to respond to escalated 

cases was updated in June 2011.

% 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 July 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

Bramble Savings Bank

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.

J.P.Morgan 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 Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing 

LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

2 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes 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 July 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. 

J.P.Morgan 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 

J.P.Morgan 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

J.P.Morgan 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 

J.P.Morgan 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 Bank of America, NA, BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home 

Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

2 J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA includes 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