Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

APPENDICES:

Participants in MHA Programs

SERVICER RESULTS:

First Lien Modification Activity 

First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity

Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners

Average Delinquency at Trial Start

Conversion Rate

Time to Resolve Escalations

Disposition of Homeowners Not in 

HAMP

 

44-45

Inside:

SUMMARY RESULTS:

Making Home Affordable Program Activity

First Lien Modification Activity

Activity for HAFA, Treasury FHA-HAMP, 2MP 

and UP

Principal Reduction Activity

First Lien Modification Characteristics 

/Modifications by Investor Type

HAMP Activity by State

HAMP Activity by MSA/

Homeowner Outreach

 

2

3

4

5-6

7

8

9

 

10

11

12

13

14

15

16-17

Report Highlights

Over 1.3 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through 

Making Home Affordable

• More than 1.1 million homeowners have received a permanent modification through the Home 

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

payments by a median of approximately $542 each month – more than one-third of their median 

before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $16.2 billion to date in monthly mortgage 

payments. 

• Nearly 100,000 second lien modifications have been started through the Second Lien Modification 

Program (2MP), and over 80,000 homeowners have exited their homes through a short sale or deedin-lieu of foreclosure with assistance from the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program 

(HAFA).

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

have been granted an estimated $8 billion in principal reduction. 74% of eligible non-GSE borrowers 

entering HAMP in October received some form of principal reduction with their modification.

This Month: Q3 2012 Servicer Assessment Results

• For the third quarter of 2012, two servicers were found to need only minor improvement on the 

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

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

follow-up program reviews.

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

result, are demonstrating considerable improvement in program implementation:

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

to determine a homeowner’s eligibility and modified payment amount under the 

program. In Q3 2012, the average income calculation error rate for the top servicers was 3 

percent.

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

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

Treasury’s program reviews disagree with the servicers’ decision not to assist a 

homeowner. In Q3 2012, the average second look disagree percentage for the top 

servicers was below 1 percent.

Note: This report reflects program activity for the Making Home Affordable Program. Unless specified, this report does not yet 

include activity relating to HAMP Tier 2, in order to allow adequate time to fully implement Tier 2 reporting into the HAMP 

system of record. Tier 2 activity will be reported in the coming months. For information and quarterly updates about the 

Hardest Hit Fund, please visit the website for the Hardest Hit Fund or the TARP Monthly Report to Congress.

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:

Overview

Servicer Results

Description of Metrics

 

18-24

25-42

43
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Program Purpose

• Home Affordable Modification 

Program (HAMP)

Provides eligible borrowers the opportunity to lower 

their first lien mortgage payment to affordable and 

sustainable levels through a uniform loan 

modification process.

• Principal Reduction 

Alternative (PRA)

Provides principal forgiveness on eligible 

underwater loans that are modified under HAMP. 

• Second Lien Modification 

Program (2MP)

Provides modifications and extinguishments on 

second liens when there has been a first lien HAMP 

modification on the same property.

• Home Affordable Foreclosure 

Alternatives (HAFA)

Provides transition alternatives to foreclosure in the 

form of a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

• FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP 

modification programs

Provides first lien modifications for distressed 

borrowers in loans guaranteed through the Federal 

Housing Administration and Rural Housing Service.

• Unemployment Program 

(UP)

Provides temporary forbearance of mortgage 

principal to enable unemployed borrowers to look for 

a new job without fear of foreclosure.

The Making Home Affordable Program was launched in March 2009 with the Home 

Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) which provides assistance to struggling 

homeowners by lowering monthly first lien mortgage payments to an affordable level. 

Additional programs were subsequently rolled out to expand the program reach.

Making Home Affordable Program Activity

2

Source: HAMP system of record for HAMP, 2MP, HAFA, FHA-HAMP, and RD-HAMP. UP participation is reported via servicer survey through September 30, 2012. 

1 Cumulative activity includes HAMP permanent modifications started, 2MP modifications started, HAFA transactions completed, FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP permanent modifications started, and UP forbearance plans started. This does not include trial 

modifications that have cancelled or not yet converted to permanent modification and HAFA agreements started but not yet completed.

In total, the MHA program has completed over 1.3 million first and second lien permanent modifications, HAFA transactions, and UP forbearance plans.

Program-to-Date Reported Since 

Prior Period

HAMP Permanent 

Modifications Started 1,106,599 16,003

2MP Modifications 

Started 99,157 2,235

HAFA Transactions 

Completed 80,263 4,840

FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP 

Permanent Modifications 

Started

9,893 793

UP Forbearance Plans 

Started (through 

September 2012) 

28,071 1,040

Cumulative MHA 

Activity1 1,323,983 24,911

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Sep 2011

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan 2012

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Monthly MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative (Left Axis)

Monthly (Right Axis)
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

HAMP is designed to lower monthly mortgage payments to help struggling 

homeowners stay in their homes and prevent avoidable foreclosure. 

HAMP (First Lien) Modifications

Total

HAMP Eligibility 

(As of September 30, 

2012)

Eligible Delinquent Loans1 2,159,397

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2 720,482

Trial

Modifications

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3 2,151,335

All Trials Started 1,941,028

Trials Reported Since September 2012 Report4 13,403

Trial Modifications Cancelled Since June 1, 20105

61,529

Active Trials 61,928

Permanent 

Modifications

All Permanent Modifications Started 1,106,599

Permanent Modifications Reported Since 

September 2012 Report 16,003

Permanent Modifications Cancelled (Cumulative)6 265,764

Active Permanent Modifications 840,835

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of September 30, 2012, include conventional 

loans: 

 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.

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

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

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

 originated on or before January 1, 2009.

Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans exclude: 

 FHA and VA loans.

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

default.

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

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

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

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

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

market analytics. 

3 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through October 31, 2012. Some servicers have begun 

to include trial plans offered under the HAMP Tier 2 eligibility requirements. The reduction is due to Wells Fargo, N.A.

restating the number of trial plan offers extended from the previous month.

4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime. 

5 772,501 cumulative including 710,972 that had trial start dates prior to June 1, 2010 when Treasury implemented a 

verified income requirement.

6 A permanent modification is canceled when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Includes 

8,080 loans paid off. Note: Unless specified, exhibits in this report refer to HAMP first lien modification activity. 

3

HAMP (First Lien) Trials Started

1,635

1,660

1,683

1,705

1,726

1,743

1,761

1,780

1,795

1,812

1,834

1,851

1,869

1,887

1,901

1,917 1,929 1,941

0

50

100

1,400

1,500

1,600

1,700

1,800

1,900

2,000

May

2011

June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2012

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct

New Trials Started (000s)

All Trials Started (000s)

Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis)

Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis)

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

time. For example, 13,403 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; 11,663 were trials 

with a first payment recorded in October 2012. 

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

731

763

791

817

857

883

910 933 951

974

994 1,009

1,026 1,043 1,060 1,077

1,091 1,107

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

May

2011

June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2012

Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct

All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:

4

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

homeowners who are unemployed. Under Treasury guidelines, unemployed homeowners 

must be considered for a minimum of 12 months’ forbearance. 

All UP Forbearance Plans Started (through Sep. 2012) 28,071

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 24,181

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 3,890

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through September 30, 2012. 

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

The Treasury FHA-HAMP Program provides assistance to eligible homeowners with FHAinsured mortgages.

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started 16,621

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 9,882

Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity

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

a first lien permanent modification who have an eligible second lien with a 

participating HAMP servicer. This assistance can result in a modification of the 

second lien and even full or partial extinguishment of the second lien. Second lien 

modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate 

reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

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

modification be permanent and active and that the second lien have an unpaid 

balance of $5,000 or more and a monthly payment of at least $100. 

All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1 99,157

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 24,617

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2 6,452

Active Second Lien Modifications3 68,088

Active Second Lien Modifications involving Partial Lien 

Extinguishments 5,765

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity 

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

October 2012 data, though the effective date may occur in November 2012. Number of modifications 

is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

2 Includes 934 loans paid off. 

3

Includes 4,340 loans in active non-payment status whereby the 1MP has disqualified from HAMP. As 

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

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Median Amount of Full Extinguishment $61,960 

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second Lien 

Modifications $9,125 

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 20% of HAFA transactions completed, the 

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

or was disqualified from HAMP. 

All HAFA Transactions Started1 107,117

HAFA Transactions Cancelled 15,518

HAFA Agreements Active2 11,336

HAFA Transactions Completed 80,263

Completed Transactions – Short Sale 78,260

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu 2,003

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity

1 All HAFA Agreements Started includes HAFA Agreements Active, HAFA Transactions Completed, and 

HAFA Transactions Cancelled.

2 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. 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

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

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

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

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

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

recognized immediately. 

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

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

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

5

HAMP Principal Reduction

HAMP Principal Reduction Activity Modification Characteristics

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

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

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

homeowners. Overall, homeowners receiving permanent loan modifications with principal 

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

HAMP Modifications 

with Earned 

Principal Reduction 

Under PRA1

HAMP 

Modifications 

with Upfront 

Principal 

Reduction 

Outside of PRA

Total HAMP 

Modifications 

with Principal 

Reduction

All Trial Modifications Started 104,191 33,361 137,552

Trials Reported Since September 2012 

Report 3,467 1,342 4,809

Active Trial Modifications 14,060 3,687 17,747

All Permanent Modifications Started 81,709 26,655 108,364

Permanent Modifications Reported 

Since September 2012 Report 4,054 1,490 5,544

Active Permanent Modifications 71,969 23,370 95,339

Median Principal Amount Reduced for 

Active Permanent Modifications2 $71,890 $54,466 $65,693 

Median Principal Amount Reduced for 

Active Permanent Modifications (%)3 31.8% 18.0% 28.1%

Total Outstanding Principal Balance 

Reduced on Active Permanent 

Modifications 2

$6,520,559,397 $1,492,181,669 $8,012,741,066 

1

Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA.

2 Under HAMP PRA, principal reduction vests over a 3 year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount that may be forgiven.

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

4

Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without principal reduction.

5 Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications. 

6 Because the first step of the standard HAMP waterfall includes the capitalization of accrued interest, out-of-pocket escrow advances to third parties, any escrow advances made to third parties during the 

trial period plan, and servicing advances that are made for costs and expenses incurred in performing servicing obligations, this can result in an increase in the principal balance after modification. As a 

result, the loan-to-value ratio can increase in the modification process.

All HAMP 

Modifications4

Total HAMP 

Modifications 

with Principal 

Reduction

Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:

- At least 60 days delinquent 80% 85%

- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default 20% 15%

Top three States by Activity5, Percent of Total Activity: 

- California 26% 36%

- Florida 12% 16%

- Illinois 5% 5%

Top Three States’ Percent of Total 43% 57%

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

- Before Modification 120% 154%

- After Modification6 119% 115%

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

- Front-End DTI 45.5% 46.6%

- Back-End DTI 71.5% 62.3%
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

6

HAMP Principal Reduction

28%

36%

43%

46% 46% 46% 45%

57%

59% 61% 60% 62% 61%

54% 54% 56% 53%

56%

59%

63% 64%

56%

37%

44% 45% 47% 46% 46% 46%

57%

60% 61% 61% 62% 63%

68% 66%

69% 72% 74%

77%

81%

75% 74%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

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

Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible 

Loans 

1

PRA All Principal Reduction 2

The terms of the $25 billion settlement of mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five largest mortgage servicers, the Federal government, and 

49 state attorneys general, have recently caused servicers to increase the use of non-PRA principal reductions. Of non-GSE loans eligible1for 

principal reduction that started a trial in October 2012, 74% included a principal reduction feature. Only 56% offered principal reduction through 

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

HAMP PRA, where the investor does not receive a financial incentive for the principal reduction. In recent months, principal reductions granted 

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

1 Eligible loans include those receiving evaluation under HAMP PRA guidelines plus loans that did not require an evaluation but received principal reduction on their modification.

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent 

modifications are:

• 67.7% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or 

unemployment)

• 10.9% reported excessive obligation

• 3.4% 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 45.5% 31.0% -14.8 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2 71.5% 53.3% -15.0 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing Payment3 $1,424.97 $814.05 -$542.33

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, 80% of homeowners were at least 60 

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

current and in imminent default. 

7

• Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP 

first lien permanent modifications are estimated to total 

approximately $16.2 billion, program to date, compared with 

unmodified mortgage obligations.

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active permanent 

first lien modifications is $542.33, or 38% of the median monthly 

payment before modification. 

• Active permanent modifications feature the following modification steps:

• 97.1% feature interest rate reductions

• 60.9% offer term extension

• 32.0% include principal forbearance

Modifications by Investor Type (Large Servicers)

Servicer GSE Private Portfolio

Total Active 

Modifications

Bank of America, N.A. 67,054 54,092 10,758 131,904

CitiMortgage, Inc. 32,847 5,622 16,978 55,447

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 25,630 6,313 12,917 44,860

Homeward Residential, Inc. 5,613 28,001 0 33,614

JPMorgan Chase N.A. 66,595 57,082 27,302 150,979

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 13,548 60,085 1,423 75,056

OneWest Bank 15,661 18,014 2,966 36,641

Select Portfolio Servicing 512 22,749 2,855 26,116

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 56,529 20,251 53,402 130,182

Other HAMP Servicers 173,256 27,017 17,691 217,964

Total 457,245 299,226 146,292 902,763

Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

8

Note: Includes active trial and permanent 

modifications from the official HAMP system of 

record.

Source: 3

rd Quarter 2012 

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 46 374 420 0.0% MT 65 957 1,022 0.1%

AL 399 4,554 4,953 0.5% NC 1,209 14,904 16,113 1.8%

AR 125 1,793 1,918 0.2% ND 11 120 131 0.0%

AZ 1,571 33,767 35,338 3.9% NE 94 1,101 1,195 0.1%

CA 14,163 216,244 230,407 25.5% NH 293 3,734 4,027 0.4%

CO 832 11,777 12,609 1.4% NJ 2,361 26,966 29,327 3.2%

CT 940 10,627 11,567 1.3% NM 242 2,753 2,995 0.3%

DC 118 1,442 1,560 0.2% NV 1,083 19,053 20,136 2.2%

DE 202 2,455 2,657 0.3% NY 4,414 41,475 45,889 5.1%

FL 7,741 101,728 109,469 12.1% OH 1,454 17,464 18,918 2.1%

GA 2,199 30,231 32,430 3.6% OK 167 1,912 2,079 0.2%

HI 274 3,229 3,503 0.4% OR 735 9,271 10,006 1.1%

IA 134 2,002 2,136 0.2% PA 1,533 16,906 18,439 2.0%

ID 196 3,189 3,385 0.4% RI 291 4,053 4,344 0.5%

IL 3,111 43,777 46,888 5.2% SC 585 7,572 8,157 0.9%

IN 571 7,780 8,351 0.9% SD 26 296 322 0.0%

KS 164 1,944 2,108 0.2% TN 705 8,304 9,009 1.0%

KY 269 3,021 3,290 0.4% TX 2,013 22,290 24,303 2.7%

LA 406 4,606 5,012 0.6% UT 382 7,666 8,048 0.9%

MA 1,776 20,082 21,858 2.4% VA 1,429 19,890 21,319 2.4%

MD 1,963 26,546 28,509 3.2% VT 67 705 772 0.1%

ME 197 2,310 2,507 0.3% WA 1,392 17,541 18,933 2.1%

MI 1,425 25,591 27,016 3.0% WI 615 7,851 8,466 0.9%

MN 775 13,381 14,156 1.6% WV 80 1,120 1,200 0.1%

MO 699 8,155 8,854 1.0% WY 29 405 434 0.0%

MS 228 2,856 3,084 0.3% Other2 129 3,065 3,194 0.4%

1 Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

2

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

60+ Day Delinquency Rate

 

 5.0% and lower 10.01% - 15.0% 20.01% 

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

HAMP Modifications

 5,000 and lower 20,001 – 35,000

 5,001 – 10,000 35,001 and higher

 10,001 – 20,000 

HAMP Activity by State Modification Activity by State

Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by Treasury 

and Partners (cumulative) 78

Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events 

(cumulative) 69,288

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1 8,820,907

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov

(October 2012) 1,993,497

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative) 159,890,203

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

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

Program to 

Date October

Total Number of Calls Taken at 

1-888-995-HOPE 3,454,706 64,356

Borrowers Referred for Free Housing 

Counseling Assistance Through the 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

1,665,646 32,957

Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Volume

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

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

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/results/MHA-Reports/ 9

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Active

Trials

Active Permanent

Modifications

Total MSA 

HAMP 

Activity

% of U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, 

CA 4,836 68,078 72,914 8.1%

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA 5,426 55,345 60,771 6.7%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano 

Beach, FL 3,498 44,389 47,887 5.3%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 

MSA 2,994 42,532 45,526 5.0%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, 

CA 2,323 42,638 44,961 5.0%

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, 

DC-VA-MD-WV 1,842 28,271 30,113 3.3%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA

1,117 27,007 28,124 3.1%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1,746 24,459 26,205 2.9%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,406 18,888 20,294 2.2%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,021 15,817 16,838 1.9%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV

888 15,617 16,505 1.8%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 864 15,494 16,358 1.8%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA 1,029 15,018 16,047 1.8%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 1,240 14,473 15,713 1.7%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, 

CA 888 14,286 15,174 1.7%

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Servicer 

Estimated 

Eligible 60+ Day 

Delinquent

Borrowers1  

Trial Plan 

Offers 

Extended2 

All HAMP 

Trials 

Started3

All HAMP 

Permanent 

Modifications

Started3

Active Trial 

Modifications3

Active Trial 

Modifications 

Lasting 6 Months 

or Longer4

Active 

Permanent 

Modifications3

Bank of America, N.A. 118,726 552,599 347,813 164,507 12,375 5,615 119,529

CitiMortgage, Inc. 29,776 211,962 140,857 66,472 2,988 885 52,459

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 25,141 111,269 75,123 57,405 2,265 21 42,595

Homeward Residential, Inc. 27,582 54,633 50,196 41,559 2,407 203 31,207

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 86,402 412,026 325,214 180,838 11,266 506 139,713

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 73,525 108,993 159,799 97,721 6,611 918 68,445

OneWest Bank 19,315 96,702 64,874 42,824 1,635 147 35,006

Select Portfolio Servicing 23,568 74,409 60,051 34,929 1,130 256 24,986

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 89,128 243,464 278,748 150,772 10,946 1,377 119,236

Other Servicers 227,319 285,278 438,353 269,572 10,305 1,262 207,659

Total 720,482 2,151,335 1,941,028 1,106,599 61,928 11,190 840,835

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer

10

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers based on survey 

information as submitted by servicers as of September 30, 2012, include 

those in conventional loans: 

 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.

 with a current unpaid principal balance less than $729,750 on a oneunit property, $934,200 on a two-unit property, $1,129,250 on a threeunit property and $1,403,400 on a four-unit property.

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

 originated on or before January 1, 2009.

Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers exclude: 

 those in FHA and VA loans.

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

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

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

negative NPV test.

 owners of vacant properties or properties otherwise excluded.

 HAMP Trials and Permanent Modifications disqualified from HAMP.

 unemployed borrowers.

Exclusions for DTI and NPV are estimated using market analytics. 

2 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through 

October 31, 2012. Servicers began accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification 

requests as of June 1, 2012 and some servicers have begun to include trial 

plans offered under the HAMP Tier 2 eligibility requirements. The reduction 

is due to Wells Fargo, N.A. restating the number of trial plan offers 

extended from the previous month.

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

reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing 

transfers. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP 

system of record at any time.

4 These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to 

permanent modifications or cancelled by the servicer, but not reported 

as such to the HAMP system of record.

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

11

Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1

1 MHA Program Effective Dates:

 HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009

 PRA: October 1, 2010

 2MP: August 13, 2009

 HAFA: April 5, 2010

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

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

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

and respective policy with regards to PRA. See page 7 for additional servicer detail on 

HAMP activity by investor type.

3

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

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

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

modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time.

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

due to servicer data corrections.

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

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

complete the transaction. 

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

HAMP First Lien Modifications Principal Reduction Alternative 

(PRA)2

Second Lien 

Modification 

(2MP)

Home Affordable Foreclosure 

Alternatives (HAFA)

Servicer Trials

Started3

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started3

Trials 

Started3

Permanent 

Modifications 

Started3

Second Lien 

Modifications 

Started4

Transactions 

Started5

Transactions 

Completed

Bank of America, N.A. 347,813 164,507 13,786 11,448 33,044 26,405 25,308

CitiMortgage, Inc. 140,857 66,472 2,385 1,923 12,248 803 528

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 75,123 57,405 2,876 2,030 4,404 4,285 3,005

Homeward Residential, Inc. 50,196 41,559 0 0 N/A 1,373 739

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 325,214 180,838 26,599 20,680 27,728 39,360 27,623

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 159,799 97,721 26,320 19,332 N/A 3,235 1,564

OneWest Bank 64,874 42,824 5,898 5,088 3,132 4,464 2,446

Select Portfolio Servicing 60,051 34,929 2,291 2,048 N/A 3,109 2,463

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 278,748 150,772 20,999 16,694 14,504 17,740 11,460

Other Servicers 438,353 269,572 3,037 2,466 4,097 6,343 5,127

Total 1,941,028 1,106,599 104,191 81,709 99,157 107,117 80,263

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

12

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

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

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

accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification requests as of 6/1/2012 and are including HAMP Tier 2 eligible loans in the outreach survey data shown here.

2 Right Party Contact (RPC) is achieved when a servicer has successfully communicated directly with the homeowner obligated under the mortgage about resolution of their delinquency in accordance with program guidelines. The RPC ratio reflects 

the share of homeowners with which the servicer has established RPC as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer needed. 

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

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

Source: Survey of 9 largest participating servicers as of September 30, 2012.

12

Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, October 2011 – September 2012

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

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

with respect to making RPC and completing the evaluations.

78%

89% 89% 87%

76%

64%

75%

31%

68%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Right Party Contact Ratio2 HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

89%

91% 92%

97%

84%

71%

94%

89%

55%
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Average Homeowner Delinquency at Trial Start1

1 For all permanent modifications started, the average number of days delinquent as of the trial plan start date. Delinquency is calculated as the number of days between the 

homeowner's last paid installment before the trial plan and the first payment due date of the trial plan.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Days

13

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

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

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

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

• Communicating decisions to the homeowners.

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

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

Maximum servicer incentive is paid for 

converting a permanent modification 

that was 120 days delinquent or less at 

trial start.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

84%

87% 86%

90% 89%

81%

91%

83%

90%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Conversion Rate

Conversion Rate1

14

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

87% Converted to Permanent Modification

3% Pending Processing or Decision

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

87% have converted to permanent modification with an average trial length of 3.5 months. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers initiated trials using stated income 

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

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

modification start. Permanent modifications transferred among servicers are credited to the originating servicer. However, trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current 

servicer's population. A servicer's conversion rate can be negatively impacted by the transfer of trial modifications.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo

Days

Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Current Quarter

15

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

referred to servicers between February 1, 2011 and November 1, 2011, cases involving bankruptcy, and cases that did not require servicer actions.

2 Target of 30 calendar days includes an estimated 5 days of processing by MHA Support Centers.

3 Resolved cases include all escalations resolved on or after February 1, 2011 through October 31, 2012 and exclude those that did not require servicer actions.

Source: MHA Support Centers. 

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

Servicers are required to resolve borrower inquiries and disputes that are escalated by the MHA Support Centers. Escalated cases include allegations 

that the servicer did not properly assess the homeowner according to program guidelines, inappropriately denied the homeowner for applicable 

MHA program(s), or initiated or continued inappropriate foreclosure actions. Effective February 1, 2011, the servicers are directed to review and 

resolve non-GSE escalated cases within 30 calendar days from receipt of the case by the escalating party. Over the last two quarters, all of the nine 

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

Target: 30 Calendar Days2

Bank of 

America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan 

Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo 

Resolved Cases3

GSE Cases 6,725 987 404 45 2,156 229 522 8 1,707

Non-GSE Cases 8,147 711 613 1,141 3,407 1,856 721 286 3,403

Total 14,872 1,698 1,017 1,186 5,563 2,085 1,243 294 5,110

Active Cases Total 175 26 10 28 90 17 10 7 113
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Disposition Path 

Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through September 2012 (Largest Servicers)

Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy 

in Process

Borrower

Current

Alternative 

Modification

Payment 

Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-inLieuForeclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions

Total

(As of 

September

2012)

Bank of America, N.A. 5,899 5,052 14,578 64,666 1,501 6,598 21,954 16,505 31,505 168,258

CitiMortgage Inc. 1,755 6,402 6,707 26,874 1,903 3,359 6,194 4,085 11,479 68,758

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 327 306 1,069 6,974 14 715 1,467 1,579 2,456 14,907

Homeward Residential, 

Inc. 196 117 495 2,706 85 613 446 753 179 5,590

JPMorgan Chase Bank, 

N.A. 4,178 3,489 21,205 40,633 1,379 2,304 14,866 13,342 14,335 115,731

Ocwen Loan Services, LLC 2,557 2,214 2,982 24,088 3,491 758 1,216 6,746 4,788 48,840

OneWest Bank 152 249 467 12,170 44 113 1,269 1,478 4,400 20,342

Select Portfolio Servicing 706 235 964 4,853 218 315 1,329 661 3,400 12,681

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 1,180 4,575 9,353 40,929 684 8,235 8,530 15,596 26,894 115,976

TOTAL 

(These Largest

Servicers)

16,950 22,639 57,820 223,893 9,319 23,010 57,271 60,745 99,436 571,083

3.0% 4.0% 10.1% 39.2% 1.6% 4.0% 10.0% 10.6% 17.4% 100%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through September 30, 2012. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded 

into the HAMP system of record. 

1 Trial loans that have been canceled, but no further action has yet been taken. 

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

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

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

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

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Disposition Path 

Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through September 2012 (Largest Servicers)

Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification:

Servicer

Action 

Pending1

Action Not 

Allowed –

Bankruptcy 

in Process

Borrower

Current

Alternative 

Modification

Payment 

Plan2 Loan Payoff

Short Sale/

Deed-inLieuForeclosure 

Starts

Foreclosure

Completions

Total

(As of 

September 

2012)

Bank of America, N.A. 19,086 14,370 80,941 143,771 7,677 22,364 46,636 45,992 58,364 439,201

CitiMortgage Inc. 10,152 16,642 23,631 61,979 8,487 6,438 21,438 14,393 24,249 187,409

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 7,036 4,470 38,285 51,840 731 11,206 14,818 14,399 18,909 161,694

Homeward Residential, 

Inc. 2,441 1,962 17,010 45,448 1,554 5,712 4,062 9,417 2,214 89,820

JPMorgan Chase Bank, 

N.A. 20,189 16,511 138,078 142,824 8,512 63,516 68,332 51,458 37,399 546,819

Ocwen Loan Services, LLC 12,853 6,901 25,769 109,782 10,506 5,320 5,898 18,425 15,001 210,455

OneWest Bank 3,690 2,437 31,095 43,064 916 4,120 7,029 9,189 13,331 114,871

Select Portfolio Servicing 2,319 441 3,075 6,831 355 461 2,517 1,393 2,953 20,345

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 14,638 9,897 57,847 46,250 1,443 18,906 33,316 28,701 34,191 245,189

TOTAL 

(These Largest 

Servicers)

92,404 73,631 415,731 651,789 40,181 138,043 204,046 193,367 206,611 2,015,803

4.6% 3.7% 20.6% 32.3% 2.0% 6.8% 10.1% 9.6% 10.2% 100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through September 30, 2012. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into 

the HAMP system of record. 

1 Homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, but no further action has yet been taken. 

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

Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios. 

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

• Offer not accepted by 

borrower/request 

withdrawn

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

Overview

Background

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

of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage 

servicers. Treasury has been publicly reporting information about servicer 

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

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

which reflects how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible 

homeowners and report program activity. 

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

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

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

mortgage modifications were even occurring. Treasury sought to get 

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

implement a national mortgage modification program. 

Through ongoing compliance reviews, Treasury has required participating 

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

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

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

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

provide more transparency to the public about servicer performance in the 

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

correct identified instances of non-compliance. 

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

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

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

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

actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such 

remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of 

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

financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to 

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

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

every successful permanent modification under the Home Affordable 

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

transactions pursuant to the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative 

Program.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

servicing operation.

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

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

providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing 

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

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

standards that have improved mortgage modifications across the industry, 

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

struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how 

mortgage modifications should be designed so that they are sustainable, 

standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as 

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

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

simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification while proceeding 

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

the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist 

homeowners.

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

consequences for servicers needing improvement.

(Continued on next page)

18
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

The Performance Data: Compliance and Program Results

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

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

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

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

the servicers and identifies areas that need remediation. Each compliance 

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

and Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and 

Program Management, Reporting and Governance. The compliance results 

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

The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested by MHA-C 

that had significant impact on homeowners and include for those highlighted 

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

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

required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs substantial 

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

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

servicer needs moderate improvement in its performance of that activity. 

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

particular activity, but the servicer may nonetheless need minor improvement 

in its performance of that activity.

Although the compliance reviews emphasize objective measurements and 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

particular activity. 

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

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

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

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

eligible homeowners under MHA guidelines and report program data. 

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

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

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

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

each of those servicers compares in specific areas under MHA. 

The Determination Process: Results of the Data

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

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

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

improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial 

improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its 

performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the 

significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments, 

Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 20 summarizes the 

overall level of improvement needed for each servicer. 

Consequences for Servicers

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

extenuating circumstances, withhold financial incentives owed to those 

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

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

reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently reduce the financial 

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

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

All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their 

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

servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors. 

Additional Information

See the “Metrics Description” on page 43 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.

19
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

3rd Quarter 2012 Servicer Assessment Results

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

Improvement Needed Servicer Name

Substantial

Moderate

Bank of America, N.A.

CitiMortgage, Inc.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Homeward Residential, Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Minor

OneWest Bank

Select Portfolio Servicing

20

For the third quarter of 2012, OneWest Bank and Select Portfolio Servicing were determined to need minor improvement in their performance under MHA 

guidelines.

CitiMortgage, Inc. was determined to need moderate improvement and their compliance results for the third quarter approached the level required for a 

determination of minor improvement. 

Bank of America, N.A., GMAC Mortgage, LLC, Homeward Residential, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. were 

also found to need moderate improvement.

Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the Third Quarter 2012 servicer assessment results.
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

21

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 4th Quarter 20101-3rd Quarter 2012

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

4Q10 1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q12 3Q12

Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West

Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average

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

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

first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth quarter of 

2010) through the most recent assessment.

Benchmark: 4%

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

Overview

22

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 4th Quarter 2010-3rd Quarter 2012

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

4Q10 1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q 2012 3Q 2012

Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West

Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average

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

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

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

(fourth quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment.

Benchmark: 10%

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

Overview

23

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 4th Quarter 2010-3rd Quarter 2012

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

4Q10 1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q12 3Q12

Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West

Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average

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

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

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

covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth 

quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment.

Benchmark: 5%

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

Overview

Second Look % Disagree1 Second Look % Unable to Determine2Income Calculation Error Rate3

Servicer 

Q4 

2010

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q2 

2012

Q3 

2012

Q4 

2010

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q2 

2012

Q3 

2012

Q4 

2010

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q2 

2012

Q3 

2012

Bank of America, 

N.A. 2.4% 1.5% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.2% 19.6% 18.8% 8.2% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 22.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0% 6.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0%

CitiMortgage, Inc. 4.0% 2.0% 0.5% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 12.3% 13.3% 5.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 3.8% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 6.0% 3.0% 4.0% 1.0% 3.1%

GMAC Mortgage, 

LLC 4.0% 4.7% 1.7% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.3% 22.7% 8.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 29.0% 6.0% 4.2% 4.2% 6.5% 4.0% 6.0% 10.0%

Homeward 

Residential, Inc. 

5.3% 1.0% 0.7% 0.0% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 29.3% 5.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.5% 1.3% 30.0% 14.0% 5.3% 2.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 4.0%

JPMorgan Chase 

Bank, N.A. 

3.9% 1.6% 1.2% 0.0% 0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 16.0% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7% 1.4% 31.0% 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0% 0.0% 2.0%

Litton Loan 

Servicing, LP4

6.0% 3.7% 3.3% 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.7% 6.3% 2.7% 2.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.0% 6.0% 2.0% 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A

Ocwen Loan 

Servicing, LLC 6.3% 6.7% 2.7% 0.0% 0.7% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 24.7% 10.3% 3.0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 18.0% 33.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.0% 0.0%

OneWest Bank 4.7% 6.7% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.3% 3.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.0% 11.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.0% 1.0% 0.0%

Select Portfolio 

Servicing 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 17.0% 2.3% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.7% 22.0% 15.0% 10.0% 3.2% 1.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0%

Wells Fargo Bank, 

N.A.8 1.7% 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 1.0% 1.3% 6.8% 6.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 1.0% 27.0% 27.0% 4.4% 5.5% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0%

1

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

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

determination.

3

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

Correctly calculating homeowner monthly income is a critical component of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an 

accurate modification payment. 

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

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: 4th Quarter 2010 – 3rd Quarter 2012

24
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

25

Bank of America, N.A.

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 1.2% 

n

< 10% 0.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 3.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.3% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed v After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, N.A. servicer

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

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from 

data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

26

Bank of America, N.A.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

35.7%

2.1%

39.7%

39.7%

2.3%

56.3%

56.3%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

83.0%

90.3%

79.6%

83.7%

89.7%

81.5%

83.5%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

24

6

33

26

7

34

27

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

1.2%

0.0%

11.2%

1.3%

0.0%

1.7%

1.7%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

Compliance Results

27

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 2.0% 

n

< 10% 3.8% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 3.1% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.5% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

v CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement due to

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed needed progress in implementing previously indentified improvements.

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

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

 Rating Legend

Third Quarter 2012

v

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

w

u

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

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from 

data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

28

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

26.6%

2.1%

39.7%

29.4%

2.3%

56.3%

37.2%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

86.5%

90.3%

79.6%

85.1%

89.7%

81.5%

84.3%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

24

6

33

24

7

34

26

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

0.5%

0.0%

11.2%

0.5%

0.0%

1.7%

0.5%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

Compliance Results

29

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 1.3% 

n

< 10% 0.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 10.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 3.3% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed v After considering all relevant factors, GMAC Mortgage, LLC servicer

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

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from 

data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

30

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

2.1%

2.1%

39.7%

2.9%

2.3%

56.3%

0.8%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

85.5%

90.3%

79.6%

83.7%

89.7%

81.5%

84.1%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

13

6

33

12

7

34

12

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

0.0%

0.0%

11.2%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

Compliance Results

31

Homeward Residential, Inc.

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 0.0% 

n

< 10% 1.3% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 4.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.7% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

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

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

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

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

Homeward Residential, Inc.

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

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:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

35.7%

10.1%

2.1%

39.7%

6.2%

2.3%

56.3%

7.5%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

89.4%

90.3%

79.6%

89.3%

89.7%

81.5%

89.1%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

29

6

33

31

7

34

32

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

0.8%

0.0%

11.2%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

0.1%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

33

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 0.1% 

n

< 10% 1.4% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 2.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.6% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

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

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

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from 

data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

34

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

5.2%

2.1%

39.7%

10.4%

2.3%

56.3%

10.2%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

87.7%

90.3%

79.6%

86.9%

89.7%

81.5%

85.8%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

32

6

33

33

7

34

34

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

0.2%

0.0%

11.2%

0.1%

0.0%

1.7%

0.2%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

Compliance Results

35

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 0.0% 

n

< 10% 1.3% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 1.0% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

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

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

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

Program Management, Reporting, and Governance

Assesses whether the servicer has effective program 

management, governance processes, and timely and correct 

submission of program reports and program information.

Incentive Payment Data Errors

Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from 

data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record

Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and 

Governance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

36

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC1

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

12.3%

2.1%

39.7%

14.0%

2.3%

56.3%

17.1%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

79.9%

90.3%

79.6%

79.6%

89.7%

81.5%

81.5%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

9

6

33

9

7

34

10

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

1.0%

0.0%

11.2%

11.2%

0.0%

1.7%

0.5%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

1Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC received transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the June 2012 reporting period increased as the result 

of approximately 6,550 transferred loans. In addition, the transfer of loans resulted in a decrease in the conversion rate and an increase in the aged trials as a percentage of active trials.
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

37

OneWest Bank

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 0.0% 

n

< 10% 0.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.0% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed v

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Third Quarter 2012

OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

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

OneWest Bank

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

6.7%

2.1%

39.7%

3.0%

2.3%

56.3%

4.1%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

90.3%

90.3%

79.6%

88.7%

89.7%

81.5%

88.7%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

14

6

33

15

7

34

16

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

0.0%

0.0%

11.2%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

Compliance Results

39

Select Portfolio Servicing

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 0.0% 

n

< 10% 0.7% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 3.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.3% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

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

u

Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

40

Select Portfolio Servicing1

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

16.1%

2.1%

39.7%

2.3%

2.3%

56.3%

6.8%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

82.9%

90.3%

79.6%

89.4%

89.7%

81.5%

89.2%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

6

6

33

7

7

34

7

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

22.8%

0.0%

11.2%

0.1%

0.0%

1.7%

0.2%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

1Select Portfolio Servicing received transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the September 2012 reporting period increased as the 

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

Compliance Results

41

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Overview 

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

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

v 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

n

< 4% 1.3% 

n

< 10% 1.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 1.0% 

n

 - 

n

< 5% 0.6% 

n

 - 

Q3 Results

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

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

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

Third Quarter 2012

 Rating Legend

v

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

w

u

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

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

42

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

35.7%

11.0%

2.1%

39.7%

8.0%

2.3%

56.3%

12.2%

0.8%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

79.9%

89.3%

90.3%

79.6%

89.7%

89.7%

81.5%

89.5%

89.5%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

32

25

6

33

24

7

34

25

7

0 10 20 30 40

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

22.8%

0.1%

0.0%

11.2%

0.1%

0.0%

1.7%

0.1%

0.0%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, N.A.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Mar. 2012

 June 2012

 Sep. 2012

Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases

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

Appendix

Metrics Descriptions

Compliance Metrics (quantitative)

Second Look % Disagree: Second Look is a process in 

which MHA-C reviews loans not in a permanent 

modification, to assess the accuracy of the servicer’s 

determination of whether the homeowner is eligible for 

a modification. This metric measures the percentage of 

loans reviewed in Second Look with which MHA-C 

disagrees with a servicer’s determination. 

Second Look % Unable to Determine: This metric 

measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second 

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

on the documentation provided, how the servicer 

reached its loan-modification decision. 

For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to Determine 

results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to 

take include, but are not limited to: reevaluating loans 

not offered HAMP modifications, submitting additional 

documentation to support the initial reason for denial of 

the modification, clarifying loan status, and engaging in 

systemic process remediation. For such results, servicers 

are also reminded of their obligation to suspend 

foreclosure of the loan until the unresolved items are 

remediated. 

Income Calculation Errors: Correctly calculating 

homeowner monthly income is a critical component of 

evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an 

accurate modification payment. This metric measures 

how often MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s calculation 

of a borrower’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up 

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

Income Calculation Error results, remedial actions 

Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not 

limited to: correcting income errors exceeding the 5% 

differential, requiring the servicer to review their own 

income calculation accuracy, enhancing policies and 

procedures, and conducting staff training on income 

calculation.

Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury pays incentives 

to servicers, investors, and homeowners for permanent 

modifications completed under MHA. Although 

intended for different recipients, all incentives are paid 

through the servicer. Data that servicers upload to the 

program system of record is used to calculate the 

incentives paid to servicers, investors, and homeowners. 

This metric measures how data anomalies between 

servicer loan files and the reported information affect 

incentive payments. For Incentive Payment Data Error 

results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to 

take include, but are not limited to: correcting the 

identified errors and correcting system and operational 

processes such that accurate data is mapped to its 

appropriate places in the program system of record. 

Compliance Metrics (qualitative)

Servicers establish processes and internal controls to 

help ensure their compliance with Program guidance. 

For each of the performance categories, Treasury 

performs a qualitative assessment of those internal 

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

assessment evaluates the nature, scope, and potential or 

actual impact on homeowners resulting from instances 

of servicer non-compliance with its own internal 

controls. For ineffective internal controls, remedial 

actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but 

are not limited to: identifying and reevaluating any 

affected loans, enhancing the effectiveness of internal 

controls, and conducting staff training on servicer 

procedures. 

Program Metrics

Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the rate 

of conversion to permanent modification for trials 

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

required to verify income documentation at trial start. 

Conversion rate is measured against all trials eligible to 

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

the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial 

modification start. 

Permanent modifications transferred among servicers 

are credited to the originating servicer. However, trial 

modifications transferred are reflected in the current 

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

negatively impacted by the transfer of trial 

modifications.

Aged Trials as % of Active Trials: This monthly metric 

measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share of 

all active trials. These figures include trial modifications 

that have been converted to permanent modifications 

by the servicer and are pending reporting to the program 

system of record, plus some portion which may be 

canceled. 

Days to Resolve Escalated Cases: This cumulative metric 

measures servicer response time for homeowner 

inquiries escalated to MHA Support Centers. Effective 

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

established for non-GSE escalation cases, including an 

estimated 5 days processing by the MHA Support 

Centers. The methodology for calculating average days 

to respond to escalated cases was updated to only 

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

The figures exclude investor denial cases escalated prior 

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

that did not require servicer actions are not included in 

the calculation of servicer time to resolve escalations.

% of Missing Modification Status Reports: This monthly 

metric measures the servicer’s ability to promptly report 

on modification status. Inconsistent and untimely 

reporting of modification status reports may impact 

incentive compensation and loan performance analysis.

For more information on the assessments, please visit: 

www.FinancialStability.gov.

43
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

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

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

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

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

Allstate Mortgage Loans & 

Investments, Inc.

AMS Servicing, LLC

Aurora Loan Services, LLC

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bank United

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC

Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC

CCO Mortgage

Central Florida Educators Federal 

Credit Union

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Citizens 1st National Bank

Community Bank & Trust Company

CUC Mortgage Corporation

DuPage Credit Union

Fay Servicing, LLC

Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank

First Bank

First Financial Bank, N.A.

Franklin Credit Management 

Corporation

Franklin Savings

Glass City Federal Credit Union

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Great Lakes Credit Union

Greater Nevada Mortgage Services

Green Tree Servicing LLC

Hartford Savings Bank

Hillsdale County National Bank

HomEq Servicing

Homeward Residential, Inc.2

Horicon Bank

IC Federal Credit Union

Idaho Housing and Finance Association

iServe Residential Lending LLC

iServe Servicing Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3

Lake City Bank

Liberty Bank and Trust Co. 

Los Alamos National Bank

Magna Bank

Marix Servicing, LLC

Midland Mortgage Company

Midwest Community Bank

Mission Federal Credit Union

Mortgage Center, LLC

Nationstar Mortgage, LLC

Navy Federal Credit Union

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC4

OneWest Bank

ORNL Federal Credit Union

Pathfinder Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage5

Purdue Employees Federal Credit 

Union

QLending, Inc.

Quantum Servicing Corporation

Residential Credit Solutions

RG Mortgage Corporation

RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing 

Corporation

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.

Schools Financial Credit Union

Select Portfolio Servicing

Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial 

Services, Inc.

ShoreBank

Silver State Schools Credit Union

Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC

Sterling Savings Bank

Technology Credit Union

The Golden 1 Credit Union

U.S. Bank National Association

United Bank

United Bank Mortgage Corporation

Vantium Capital, Inc.

Vist Financial Corp.

Wealthbridge Mortgage Corp. 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.6

Yadkin Valley Bank

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

Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

2 Formerly American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage 

Corporation. 

4 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.

5 Formerly National City Bank.

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

Appendix A1: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP

44
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through October 2012

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC

OneWest Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

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

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4

FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP)

Amarillo National Bank

American Financial Resources Inc. 

Aurora Financial Group, Inc. 

Aurora Loan Services, LLC 

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico 

Bank of America, N.A.1

Capital International Financial, Inc. 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

CU Mortgage Services, Inc. 

First Federal Bank of Florida 

First Mortgage Corporation 

Franklin Savings 

Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

Green Tree Servicing, LLC 

Guaranty Bank 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

James B. Nutter & Company 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2

M&T Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Marsh Associates, Inc. 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage ,LLC 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 5

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, N.A.4

Weststar Mortgage, Inc. 

FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP)

Bank of America, N.A.1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Green Tree Servicing, LLC

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

PNC Bank, National Association 

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4

Rural Housing Service Modification Program 

(RD-HAMP)

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico

Bank of America, N.A.1

Horicon Bank 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2

Magna Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.4

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

LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage 

Corporation. 

3 Formerly National City Bank.

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

5 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs

45