Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 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

 

45-46

Inside:

SUMMARY RESULTS:

Making Home Affordable Program Activity

HAMP Expansion Servicer Implementation

First Lien Modification Activity

Activity for 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP, HAFA 

and UP

Principal Reduction Alternative

First Lien Modification Characteristics 

/Modifications by Investor Type

HAMP Activity by State

HAMP Activity by MSA/

Homeowner Outreach

Aged Trials

 

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

 

11

12

13

14

15

16

17-18

Report Highlights

Over 1.1 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through Making Home 

Affordable

• More than 1 million homeowners have received a permanent modification through the 

Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). These homeowners have reduced their 

mortgage payments by a median of approximately $535 each month – more than one-third 

of their median before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $12.7 billion to 

date in monthly mortgage payments. 

• For homeowners currently in HAMP permanent modifications with the Principal Reduction 

Alternative feature, the median amount of principal reduced is $68,267. To date, 

homeowners in PRA are further underwater and more are seriously delinquent at trial start 

than the overall population of HAMP participants. 88% of homeowners in the PRA program 

are at least 60 days delinquent at trial start (compared to 80% of the overall HAMP 

population) with a before-modification loan-to-value ratio of 157% (compared to 120% for 

the overall HAMP population). 70% of eligible non-GSE customers entering HAMP in recent 

months have received some form of principal reduction with their modification.

This Month: Q1 2012 Servicer Assessment Results

• For the first quarter of 2012, three servicers were found to need only minor improvement 

on the areas reviewed for program performance, while six servicers were found to need 

moderate improvement. All servicers will need to continue to demonstrate progress in 

areas identified in follow-up program reviews.

Included this Month: Servicer Implementation Dates for HAMP Expansion

• On January 27, 2012, Treasury announced program enhancements to expand program 

eligibility to include a “Tier 2” evaluation. HAMP Tier 2 is 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.

• As of June 1, 2012, servicers have informed Treasury that they have begun accepting HAMP 

Tier 2 modification requests from borrowers. For more detail, please refer to page 3.

Notes: 

• This report reflects program activity for the Making Home Affordable Program. 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.

• Effective May 29, 2012, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. changed its name to Homeward Residential.

SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS:

Overview

Servicer Results

Description of Metrics

 

19-25

26-43

44
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 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.

• 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.

• Principal Reduction 

Alternative (PRA)

Provides principal forgiveness on eligible underwater 

loans that are modified under HAMP. 

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 Mar. 31, 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 1.1 million first and second lien permanent modifications, HAFA transactions, and UP forbearance plans.

Program-to-Date Reported Since 

Prior Period

HAMP Permanent 

Modifications Started 1,008,689 15,167

2MP Modifications 

Started 80,090 3,872

HAFA Agreements 

Completed 44,749 4,497

FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP 

Permanent Modifications 

Started

6,502 371

UP Forbearance Plans 

Started (through Mar. 

2012) 

22,193 1,791

Cumulative MHA 

Activity1 1,162,223 25,698

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

July

2011

Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

2012

Feb Mar Apr

Monthly MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative MHA Activity (000s)

Cumulative (Left Axis)

Monthly (Right Axis)
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Feb ‘12 Mar ‘12 Apr ‘12 May ‘12 Jun ‘12 Jul ‘12 Aug ‘12 Sep ‘12 Oct ‘12

Full Implementation 10/15/20122. 

Full Implementation 8/31/20122

Full Implementation by 6/22/20122.

Full Implementation 6/4/20122

Full Implementation 7/10/20122

Supplemental Directive (SD) Published

SD Effective 

Date

Full Implementation 6/1/2012

Full Implementation 6/29/20122

Full Implementation 6/15/20122

Full Implementation 6/18/20122

Full Implementation 6/1/2012

Full Implementation 6/1/2012

Full Implementation 6/1/2012

Full Implementation 7/22/20122

Full Implementation 6/1/2012

Full Implementation 6/1/2012

Full Implementation 6/4/20122

Bank of America, NA

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

OneWest

Homeward Residential

Select Portfolio Servicing

National City Bank/PNC Mortgage

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC

Nationstar Mortgage LLC3

Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC

U.S. Bank National Association

Green Tree Servicing, LLC

Bank United

Midland Mortgage Company

HAMP Tier 2 Servicer Implementation Timelines1

1 As reported by servicers to Treasury.

2 All servicers that are not ready to fully implement Tier 2 on June 1, 2012 will be accepting requests beginning June 1, 2012. 3 Aurora Loan Services, LLC will transfer all non-GSE loans to Nationstar Mortgage LLC on 7/1/2012. 3

Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC Full Implementation 6/1/2012

CitiMortgage, Inc. Full Implementation by 6/1/2012

On January 27, 2012, Treasury announced program 

enhancements to expand MHA eligibility to include a HAMP Tier 2 

evaluation. As of June 1, 2012, servicers have informed Treasury 

that they have begun accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification 

requests from borrowers. The chart to the left shows the date 

that the largest servicers have communicated to Treasury that 

they expect to achieve full program implementation. In some 

cases, servicers may implement some aspects of the program 

before that date. In order to ensure that no borrower is 

negatively impacted by a delay, Treasury has imposed additional 

requirements on all servicers that did not fully implement HAMP 

Tier 2 by the June 1 effective date.

These servicers must:

• develop a process to identify potentially eligible Tier 2 

borrowers;

• stop foreclosure referrals and foreclosure sales for those 

borrowers; and

• ensure that a single point of contact is assigned to each of 

those borrowers.

Additionally, servicers who are unable to fully implement HAMP 

Tier 2 by mid-July will be required to evaluate and offer borrowers 

proprietary modifications similar to HAMP Tier 2, and either 

automatically convert or re-evaluate those borrowers for HAMP 

Tier 2 modifications following implementation.

Treasury will conduct compliance reviews to ensure all servicers 

appropriately implement HAMP Tier 2 and if applicable, adhere to 

these interim requirements.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

HAMP (First Lien) Modifications

Total

HAMP Eligibility 

(As of Mar.31, 2012)

Eligible Delinquent Loans1 2,297,666

Eligible Delinquent Borrowers2 764,172

Trial

Modifications

Trial Plan Offers Extended (Cumulative)3 2,026,291

All Trials Started 1,849,097

Trials Reported Since March 2012 Report4 19,363

Trial Modifications Canceled Since June 1, 20105 52,689

Active Trials 72,412

Permanent 

Modifications

All Permanent Modifications Started 1,008,689

Permanent Modifications Reported Since 

March 2012 Report 15,167

Permanent Modifications Canceled (Cumulative)6 207,151

Active Permanent Modifications 801,538

1 Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent loans as reported by servicers as of March 31, 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 April 30, 2012. 4 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at anytime. 5 767,996 cumulative including 715,307 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 4,029 loans paid off.

HAMP is designed to lower monthly mortgage payments to help struggling 

homeowners stay in their homes and prevent avoidable foreclosure. 

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

4

HAMP (First Lien) Trials Started

1,509

1,544

1,579

1,612

1,639

1,665

1,687

1,709

1,730 1,747

1,765 1,783 1,798 1,815

1,835

1,849

0

50

100

1,350

1,450

1,550

1,650

1,750

1,850

Jan

2011

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

2012

Feb Mar Apr

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, 19,363 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior 

report; 14,502 were trials with a first payment recorded in April 2012. 

HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative)

608

634

670

699

731

763

791 817

857

883

910

933

951

974 994 1,009

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

Jan

2011

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

2012

Feb Mar Apr

All Permanent Modifications Started (000s)

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

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Of the Active Second Lien Modifications:

5

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 Mar. 2012) 22,193

UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 19,287

UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 2,906

Unemployment Program (UP) Activity

Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through Mar. 31, 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 10,527

All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 6,501

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. 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 80,090

Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 17,270

Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2 2,946

Active Second Lien Modifications3 59,874

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity 

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

April 2012 data, though the effective date may occur in May 2012. Number of modifications is net of 

cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections.

2 Includes 148 loans paid off. 

3 Includes 2,789 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.

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

reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness.

Second Lien Partially Extinguished 3,457

Second Lien Loan Modifications4 56,417

Second Lien Extinguishment Details

Median Amount of Full Extinguishment $61,274

Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second 

Lien Modifications $7,554

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 agreements started, the 

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

or was disqualified from HAMP. 

All HAFA Agreements Started1 68,050

HAFA Agreements Active 12,438

HAFA Transactions Completed 44,749

Completed Transactions – Short Sale 43,480

Completed Transactions – Deed-in-Lieu 1,269

Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity

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

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

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

include HAFA Agreements Active, HAFA Transactions Completed, and HAFA Transactions Canceled.
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

The Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) was implemented in October 2010. PRA requires servicers of non-GSE loans to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for mortgages with a loan-tovalue (LTV) ratio greater than 115% when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP first lien modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for PRA, they are not required to 

offer principal reduction and generally may only do so when permitted by the mortgage investor.

PRA pays investors incentives for every dollar of principal forgiven, according to a sliding scale and depending on the degree to which the homeowner's unmodified balance is greater than the 

market value of the home. To encourage investors to consider or expand the use of principal reduction, Treasury issued program guidance on February 16, 2012 tripling financial incentives under 

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 PRA and have a trial period plan effective date on or after March 1, 2012. PRA can be a feature of a HAMP trial or permanent modification.

6

Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA)

1 Under the PRA program, principal reduction is vested over a 3 year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount that may be 

forgiven.

2 PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization. 3 Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without the PRA feature. 4 Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

5 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. 6 PRA evaluation is required for non-GSE modifications with a before-modification post-arrearage LTV of greater than 115% and NPV 

evaluation date after 10/1/2010. Eligible loans include those receiving evaluation plus loans that did not require evaluation but received 

principal reduction on their modification.

7 All Principal Forgiveness population consists of trials that have any principal forgiveness, including those with PRA and without PRA.

PRA Activity Modification Characteristics

Loan Characteristics All 1MP3 1MP with PRA

Of trials started, delinquency at trial start:

- At least 60 days delinquent 80% 88%

- Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default 20% 12%

Top three States by Activity4, Percent of Total Activity:

- California 25% 31%

- Florida 12% 17%

- Illinois 5% 6%

Top three States’ Percent of Total 43% 53%

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

- Before Modification 120% 157%

- After Modification5 121% 115%

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

- Front-End DTI 45.4% 45.3%

- Back-End DTI 76.2% 66.3%

All PRA Trial Modifications Started 82,587

PRA Trial Modifications Active 16,986

All PRA Permanent Modifications Started 59,596

PRA Permanent Modifications Active 54,760

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent 

Modifications1 $68,267

Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent 

Modifications (%)2 31.3%

Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Active Permanent 

Modifications under PRA $4,679,512,841

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

policy, servicers can only offer principal forgiveness on non-GSE modifications under 

HAMP. 

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

data indicate that the PRA program is 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 the PRA feature also have a higher before-modification LTV ratio 

than those without the PRA feature.

28%

36%

43% 46% 46% 46% 45%

56% 59% 61% 61% 62% 63% 62% 65% 60% 37%

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

56% 59% 61% 61% 63% 64% 68% 66% 70%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Trials Started with Principal 

Reduction as a % of Eligible 

Loans 6

PRA All Principal Forgiveness 7

Due to 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, 

the volume of non-incented principal forgiveness outside of the constructs of the PRA 

program has recently increased. Of non-GSE trials started in April 2012 that had an LTV 

greater than 115%, 70% included a principal forgiveness feature, including 60% through the 

PRA program. 
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

• The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent 

modifications are:

• 66.9% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or 

unemployment)

• 11.4% 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 45.4% 31.0% -14.5 pct pts

Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2 76.2% 58.7% -14.8 pct pts

Median Monthly Housing Payment3 $1,428.55 $824.00 -$534.98

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 $12.7 billion, program to date, compared with 

unmodified mortgage obligations.

• The median monthly savings for borrowers in active permanent 

first lien modifications is $534.98, or 37% of the median monthly 

payment before modification. 

• Active permanent modifications feature the following modification steps:

• 97.5% feature interest rate reductions

• 59.6% offer term extension

• 31.0% include principal forbearance

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

Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 Effective May 29, 2012, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. changed its name to Homeward Residential. 

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

4 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. 5 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

Note: Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications.

Modifications by Investor Type (Large Servicers)

Servicer GSE Private Portfolio

Total Active 

Modifications

Bank of America, NA1 82,180 62,235 10,835 155,250

CitiMortgage, Inc. 32,399 5,529 17,078 55,006

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 25,563 6,088 12,490 44,141

Homeward Residential2 1,262 27,172 0 28,434

JPMorgan Chase NA3 67,239 53,029 25,511 145,779

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 4 6,775 46,325 119 53,219

OneWest Bank 15,418 16,964 2,837 35,219

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 1,391 9,859 1,557 12,807

Select Portfolio Servicing 514 16,659 2,688 19,861

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 5 54,990 16,733 49,237 120,960

Other HAMP Servicers 161,812 24,880 16,582 203,274

Total 449,543 285,473 138,934 873,950
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

8

Note: Includes active trial and permanent 

modifications from the official HAMP system of 

record.

Source: 1st 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 46 348 394 0.0% MT 78 923 1,001 0.1%

AL 470 4,442 4,912 0.6% NC 1,417 14,199 15,616 1.8%

AR 157 1,718 1,875 0.2% ND 11 129 140 0.0%

AZ 2,036 33,459 35,495 4.1% NE 127 1,045 1,172 0.1%

CA 17,155 203,131 220,286 25.2% NH 308 3,608 3,916 0.4%

CO 994 11,096 12,090 1.4% NJ 2,626 25,630 28,256 3.2%

CT 1,047 9,957 11,004 1.3% NM 265 2,614 2,879 0.3%

DC 136 1,358 1,494 0.2% NV 1,275 19,148 20,423 2.3%

DE 230 2,367 2,597 0.3% NY 4,492 38,615 43,107 4.9%

FL 9,110 96,553 105,663 12.1% OH 1,712 16,891 18,603 2.1%

GA 2,711 28,909 31,620 3.6% OK 217 1,818 2,035 0.2%

HI 254 3,046 3,300 0.4% OR 809 8,760 9,569 1.1%

IA 185 1,923 2,108 0.2% PA 1,611 16,183 17,794 2.0%

ID 277 3,045 3,322 0.4% RI 299 3,991 4,290 0.5%

IL 3,714 42,169 45,883 5.3% SC 730 7,294 8,024 0.9%

IN 697 7,461 8,158 0.9% SD 32 283 315 0.0%

KS 198 1,854 2,052 0.2% TN 878 7,990 8,868 1.0%

KY 284 2,901 3,185 0.4% TX 2,359 21,083 23,442 2.7%

LA 443 4,416 4,859 0.6% UT 490 7,474 7,964 0.9%

MA 1,847 19,308 21,155 2.4% VA 1,610 18,953 20,563 2.4%

MD 2,244 25,384 27,628 3.2% VT 69 688 757 0.1%

ME 194 2,228 2,422 0.3% WA 1,631 16,448 18,079 2.1%

MI 1,830 25,077 26,907 3.1% WI 775 7,539 8,314 1.0%

MN 944 13,039 13,983 1.6% WV 89 1,089 1,178 0.1%

MO 768 7,939 8,707 1.0% WY 30 390 420 0.0%

MS 261 2,836 3,097 0.4% Other2 240 2,789 3,029 0.3%

1 Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications.

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

60+ Day Delinquency Rate

 

 5.0% and lower 10.01% - 15.0% 20.01% 

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

HAMP Modifications

 5,000 and lower 20,001 – 35,000

 5,001 – 10,000 35,001 and higher

 10,001 – 20,000 

HAMP Activity by State Modification Activity by State

Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State
Making Home Affordable: Summary Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by 

Treasury and Partners (cumulative) 69

Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events 

(cumulative) 64,968

Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)1 8,512,716

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov

(April 2012) 2,512,543

Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative) 146,167,477

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 April

Total Number of Calls Taken at 

1-888-995-HOPE 3,051,799 72,571

Borrowers Referred for Free Housing 

Counseling Assistance Through the 

Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline

1,456,732 35,432

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

Permanent

Modifications

Total MSA 

HAMP 

Activity

% of U.S. 

HAMP 

Activity

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, 

CA 5,838 62,712 68,550 7.8%

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA 5,622 51,668 57,290 6.6%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano 

Beach, FL 4,177 41,252 45,429 5.2%

Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 

MSA 3,544 40,977 44,521 5.1%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, 

CA 2,944 41,313 44,257 5.1%

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, 

DC-VA-MD-WV 2,063 27,036 29,099 3.3%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA 1,469 26,961 28,430 3.3%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 2,173 23,377 25,550 2.9%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,660 17,307 18,967 2.2%

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 1,047 15,718 16,765 1.9%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 1,085 15,218 16,303 1.9%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,185 14,837 16,022 1.8%

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA 1,192 14,572 15,764 1.8%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 1,296 13,950 15,246 1.7%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, 

CA 1,115 13,650 14,765 1.7%

15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity

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

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Aged Trials1

190,412

165,543

117,574

94,269

76,502

69,418

49,229

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

27,345

19,793 18,359 20,332 21,002 21,211

15,815 13,177 12,601

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

May

2010

June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan

2011

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

2012

Feb March Apr

Trials Lasting 6 Months or Longer At End of Month

1 Active trials initiated at least six months ago. See page 11 for number of aged trials by servicer. 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. 

The number of active trials lasting 6 months or longer is approximately 12,600.

Program guidance directs servicers to cancel or convert trial modifications after 3 or 4 

monthly payments, depending on circumstances.

10
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

As of 

Mar. 31, 2012 Cumulative As of Apr. 30, 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, NA5 143,079 539,396 382,492 183,081 13,027 5,854 142,223

CitiMortgage, Inc. 47,900 205,146 138,225 62,740 3,621 1,356 51,385

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 19,833 87,003 70,818 52,676 3,105 24 41,036

Homeward Residential 31,079 44,935 40,975 34,112 1,819 129 26,615

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA6 113,219 360,939 309,171 161,638 16,019 1,507 129,760

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC7 52,936 97,597 107,633 65,389 7,063 1,020 46,156

OneWest Bank 27,816 78,857 61,575 38,105 3,118 107 32,101

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 10,825 45,168 39,670 17,008 564 69 12,243

Select Portfolio Servicing 7,082 71,340 44,974 25,166 957 40 18,904

Wells Fargo Bank, NA8 97,731 301,179 262,620 133,856 11,509 1,229 109,451

Other SPA servicers9 63,690 194,731 202,903 114,100 5,774 571 91,511

Other GSE Servicers10 148,982 NA 188,041 120,818 5,836 695 100,153

Total 764,172 2,026,291 1,849,097 1,008,689 72,412 12,601 801,538

HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer

11

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

of Mar. 31, 2012, include those in conventional loans: 

 in foreclosure and bankruptcy.

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

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

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

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

 originated on or before January 1, 2009.

Estimated eligible 60+ day delinquent borrowers exclude: 

 those in FHA and VA loans.

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

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

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

NPV test.

 owners of vacant properties or properties otherwise excluded.

 HAMP Trials and Permanent Modifications disqualified from HAMP.

 unemployed borrowers.

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

Apr. 30, 2012. 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 5 Bank of America, NA includes all loans previously reported under BAC 

Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit 

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

EMC Mortgage Corporation. 7 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP.

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

Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. 9 Other SPA servicers are entities excluding the 10 largest servicers that have 

signed participation agreements with Treasury and Fannie Mae. A full list 

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

Freddie Mac. Includes GSE loans previously transferred from SPA 

servicers.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

12

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.

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

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

due to servicer data corrections.

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

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

complete the transaction. 

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

Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

7

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

Corporation.

8 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. 9 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, 

FSB. 

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

HAMP First Lien Modifications 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

Agreements 

Started5

Agreements 

Completed

Bank of America, NA6 382,492 183,081 15,251 12,474 26,866 13,652 12,118

CitiMortgage, Inc. 138,225 62,740 2,328 1,770 10,182 189 152

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 70,818 52,676 1,820 971 4,192 2,612 1,766

Homeward Residential 40,975 34,112 0 0 N/A 672 336

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA7 309,171 161,638 19,039 12,655 21,215 26,313 16,027

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC8 107,633 65,389 18,708 11,957 N/A 2,245 1,053

OneWest Bank 61,575 38,105 4,606 3,273 2,269 2,401 1,121

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 39,670 17,008 579 516 N/A 399 114

Select Portfolio Servicing 44,974 25,166 132 108 N/A 2,347 1,676

Wells Fargo Bank, NA9 262,620 133,856 18,126 14,173 12,696 13,409 7,355

Other Servicers 390,944 234,918 1,998 1,699 2,670 3,811 3,031

Total 1,849,097 1,008,689 82,587 59,596 80,090 68,050 44,749
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

13

1 Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before Jan. 1, 2009 and were owner-occupied at origination; excludes 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. 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 10 largest participating servicers as of March 31, 2012.

13

Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, Apr. 2011 – Mar. 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.

75%

70%

83%

97%

79%

64%

80%

88%

79%

69%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bank of

America

CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan

Chase

Ocwen OneWest Saxon SPS Wells Fargo

Right Party Contact Ratio2 HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3

99%

92%

87%

96%

90% 87%

94%

89% 90%

85%
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 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

Bank of

America

CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan

Chase

Ocwen OneWest Saxon SPS Wells Fargo Other

Servicers

Days

14

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

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

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

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

• Communicating decisions to the homeowners.

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

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

Maximum servicer incentive is paid for 

converting a permanent modification 

that was 120 days delinquent or less at 

trial start.
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

84% 84% 84%

89%

86%

81%

90%

82%

90% 90%

87% 88%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Bank of

America

CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan

Chase

Ocwen OneWest Saxon SPS Wells Fargo Other SPA

Servicers

Other GSE

Servicers

Conversion Rate

Average of Trials Started Before 6/1/10 (43%) Average of Trials Started On/After 6/1/10 (86%)

Conversion Rate1

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

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

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

population.

Following the implementation of verified income 

documentation in June 2010, rates of converting trial 

modifications into permanent modifications have risen 

substantially. Of eligible trials started on or after June 1, 

2010, 86% have converted to permanent modification with 

an average trial length of 3.5 months.

15

Of Trials Started Before 6/1/10:

43% Converted to Permanent Modification

0.3% Pending Processing or Decision

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

86% Converted to Permanent Modification

4.0% Pending Processing or Decision
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

16

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

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

3 Resolved cases include all escalations resolved on or after February 1, 2011 through April 30, 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. In the last two quarters, most of the ten 

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 Saxon SPS Wells Fargo 

Resolved Cases3

GSE Cases 5,749 783 311 34 1,808 166 449 65 4 1,290 

Non-GSE Cases 6,475 543 477 877 2,940 1,335 597 256 203 2,369 

Total 12,224 1,326 788 911 4,748 1,501 1,046 321 207 3,659 

Active Cases Total 222 30 15 38 62 22 12 1 - 169 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward

Residential

JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest Saxon SPS Wells Fargo

Days

Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Current QTD
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Disposition Path 

Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through March 2012 (10 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 

March 

2012)

Bank of America, NA3 11,488 7,384 17,483 67,019 2,048 5,367 19,965 23,026 28,465 182,245

CitiMortgage Inc. 695 6,165 7,444 28,904 1,960 4,897 5,791 5,564 10,163 71,583

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 960 490 1,699 5,675 110 621 1,189 1,704 2,189 14,637

Homeward Residential 148 89 193 2,612 54 407 360 674 189 4,726

JPMorgan Chase Bank NA4 4,931 2,886 24,226 44,948 292 1,631 13,273 17,552 12,487 122,226

Ocwen Loan Services LLC5 1,613 1,015 1,490 16,163 2,194 201 451 4,179 1,794 29,100

OneWest Bank 219 273 540 12,074 66 107 1,210 1,627 4,233 20,349

Saxon Mortgage Services, 

Inc. 1,931 902 2,142 3,543 405 495 1,108 3,896 4,220 18,642

Select Portfolio Servicing 934 334 1,283 5,588 234 479 1,395 1,153 3,910 15,310

Wells Fargo Bank NA6 6,579 4,698 9,993 42,833 638 3,986 7,393 16,410 23,842 116,372

TOTAL 

(These 10 Largest

Servicers)

29,498 24,236 66,493 229,359 8,001 18,191 52,135 75,785 91,492 595,190

5.0% 4.1% 11.2% 38.5% 1.3% 3.1% 8.8% 12.7% 15.4% 100.0%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through March 31, 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. 

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

5Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. 6 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

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

The most common causes of 

trial cancellations from all 

servicers are:

• Insufficient documentation

• Trial plan payment default 

• Ineligible borrower: 

first lien housing expense is 

already below 31% of 

household income

17
Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Disposition Path 

Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications

Survey Data Through March 2012 (10 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 

March 

2012)

Bank of America, NA3 32,344 18,057 95,771 157,538 9,974 13,601 48,253 64,061 56,618 496,217

CitiMortgage Inc. 3,005 14,392 28,039 58,150 7,481 18,530 17,793 17,313 19,729 184,432

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 12,464 6,371 53,321 41,061 1,476 7,937 10,519 17,344 18,439 168,932

Homeward Residential 2,598 1,835 16,161 43,988 1,435 3,807 3,172 9,906 2,096 84,998

JPMorgan Chase Bank NA4 24,893 12,487 167,676 132,529 2,088 45,437 56,133 64,504 28,856 534,603

Ocwen Loan Services LLC5 12,032 5,203 19,244 81,354 9,612 3,113 3,146 15,753 9,302 158,759

OneWest Bank 5,246 2,486 27,087 32,320 992 2,569 5,689 8,400 12,073 96,862

Saxon Mortgage Services, 

Inc. 4,192 1,353 6,996 8,128 708 1,220 1,070 5,095 3,768 32,530

Select Portfolio Servicing 2,376 439 3,548 6,415 328 449 1,617 1,516 2,402 19,090

Wells Fargo Bank NA6 20,983 8,310 48,780 48,032 1,335 13,706 26,606 24,087 29,085 220,924

TOTAL 

(These 10 Largest 

Servicers)

120,133 70,933 466,623 609,515 35,429 110,369 173,998 227,979 182,368 1,997,347

6.0% 3.6% 23.4% 30.5% 1.8% 5.5% 8.7% 11.4% 9.1% 100%

Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through March 31, 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. 

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

5 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. 6 Wells Fargo Bank, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB.

Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios. 

The most common causes of 

trials not accepted from all 

servicers are:

• Insufficient documentation

• Ineligible borrower: 

first lien housing expense is 

already below 31% of 

household income

• Offer Not Accepted by 

Borrower/Request 

Withdrawn

18
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. During the fourth quarter of 2011, 

Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan 

Servicing, LLC, and therefore there is no servicer assessment for Litton Loan 

Servicing, LP for this quarter nor will there be for future quarters. 

Subsequent servicer assessments will be published for the remaining largest 

servicers, who comprise the majority of MHA activity. Not only will the 

assessments provide more transparency to the public about servicer 

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

encourage servicers to correct identified instances of non-compliance. 

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

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

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

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

actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such 

remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of 

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

financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to 

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

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

every successful permanent modification under the Home Affordable 

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

transactions pursuant to the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative 

Program.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

servicing operation.

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

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

providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing 

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

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

standards that have improved mortgage modifications across the industry, 

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

struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how 

mortgage modifications should be designed so that they are sustainable, 

standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as 

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

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

simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification while proceeding 

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

the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist 

homeowners.

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

consequences for servicers needing improvement.

(Continued on next page)

19
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

The Performance Data: Compliance and Program Results

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

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

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

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

the servicers and identifies areas that need remediation. Each compliance 

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

and Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and 

Program Management, Reporting and Governance. The compliance results 

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

The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested by MHA-C 

that had significant impact on homeowners and include for those highlighted 

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

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

required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs substantial 

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

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

servicer needs moderate improvement in its performance of that activity. 

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

particular activity, but the servicer may nonetheless need minor improvement 

in its performance of that activity.

Although the compliance reviews emphasize objective measurements and 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

particular activity. 

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

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

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

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

eligible homeowners under MHA guidelines and report program data. 

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

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

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

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

each of those servicers compares in specific areas under MHA. 

The Determination Process: Results of the Data

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

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

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

improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial 

improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its 

performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the 

significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments, 

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

overall level of improvement needed for each servicer. 

Consequences for Servicers

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

extenuating circumstances, withhold financial incentives owed to those 

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

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

reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently reduce the financial 

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

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

All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their 

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

servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors. 

Additional Information

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

compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more 

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

Overview

1st Quarter 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, NA

CitiMortgage, Inc.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Minor

OneWest Bank

Select Portfolio Servicing

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

21

For the first quarter of 2012, OneWest Bank, Select Portfolio Servicing and Wells Fargo Bank, NA were determined to need minor improvement in their 

performance under MHA guidelines.

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

level required for a determination of minor improvement. Homeward Residential and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC were also found to need moderate improvement.

Bank of America, NA and JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA were found to need moderate improvement and successfully remediated previously identified items.

Treasury released all currently withheld incentives as part of the $25 billion settlement of mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five largest mortgage 

servicers, the Federal government, and 49 state attorneys general . Treasury continues to retain the right to withhold incentives in future periods.

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

Overview

22

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 4th Quarter 2010-1st 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

Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton Ocwen OneWest

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 

required benchmark is that the second look % disagree must be less than 4%.

Benchmark: 4%
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

23

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 4th Quarter 2010-1st Quarter 2012

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

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

Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton Ocwen OneWest

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 required benchmark is that the second look % unable to determine must be less than 10%.

Benchmark: 10%
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

24

MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 4th Quarter 2010-1st Quarter 2012

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

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

Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential

JPMorgan Chase Litton Ocwen OneWest

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 

required 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.

Benchmark: 5%
MHA Servicer Assessment 

Overview

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

Servicer 

Q4 

2010

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q4 

2010

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Q4 

2010

Q1 

2011

Q2 

2011

Q3 

2011

Q4 

2011

Q1 

2012

Bank of America, 

NA 2.4% 1.5% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 19.6% 18.8% 8.2% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 22.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0% 6.0% 5.0%

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

GMAC Mortgage, 

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

Homeward 

Residential 5.3% 1.0% 0.7% 0.0% 1.5% 1.0% 29.3% 5.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 30.0% 14.0% 5.3% 2.0% 1.0% 2.0%

JPMorgan Chase 

Bank, NA 3.9% 1.6% 1.2% 0.0% 0.7% 0.2% 16.0% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 31.0% 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0%

Litton Loan 

Servicing, LP4 6.0% 3.7% 3.3% 1.0% N/A N/A 5.7% 6.3% 2.7% 2.0% N/A N/A 6.0% 6.0% 2.0% 1.0% N/A N/A

Ocwen Loan 

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

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

Select Portfolio 

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

Wells Fargo Bank, 

NA8 1.7% 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 6.8% 6.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 27.0% 27.0% 4.4% 5.5% 4.0% 2.0%

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 - 1st Quarter 2012

25
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

26

Bank of America, NA

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 2.0% 



< 10% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 5.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.9% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Bank of America, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, NA servicer incentives will not be 

withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

27

Bank of America, NA

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

56%

56%

1%

67%

67%

4%

35%

35%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

84%

90%

79%

81%

90%

72%

76%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

27

7

36

29

8

39

32

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

1.7%

0.0%

3.7%

3.7%

0.0%

3.6%

3.6%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Bank of

America, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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

28

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.0% 



< 10% 0.5% 



 - 



< 5% 4.0% 



 - 



< 5% 4.7% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

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

withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

29

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 (%)

56%

37%

1%

67%

43%

4%

35%

35%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

84%

90%

79%

83%

90%

72%

81%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

26

7

36

27

8

39

28

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.5%

0.0%

3.7%

2.1%

0.0%

3.6%

2.3%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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

30

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 4.0% 



 - 



< 5% 1.0% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



GMAC Mortgage, LLC. has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors, GMAC Mortgage, LLC servicer incentives will not be 

withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

31

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 (%)

56%

1%

1%

67%

4%

4%

35%

2%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

84%

90%

79%

84%

90%

72%

84%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

12

7

36

12

8

39

12

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

3.7%

0.1%

0.0%

3.6%

0.1%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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

32

Homeward Residential

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.0% 



< 10% 1.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.6% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Homeward Residential has areas requiring moderate improvement.

After considering all relevant factors, Homeward Residential servicer incentives will not 

be withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

33

Homeward Residential

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:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 2012

56%

8%

1%

67%

6%

4%

35%

8%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

89%

90%

79%

88%

90%

72%

86%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

32

7

36

31

8

39

28

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.1%

0.0%

3.7%

0.1%

0.0%

3.6%

0.2%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Homeward

Residential

Best

Servicer

Performance
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

34

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.2% 



< 10% 0.7% 



 - 



< 5% 9.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.2% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA has areas requiring moderate improvement.

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

not be withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

35

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

56%

10%

1%

67%

13%

4%

35%

23%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

86%

90%

79%

83%

90%

72%

72%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

34

7

36

36

8

39

39

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.2%

0.0%

3.7%

0.2%

0.0%

3.6%

0.2%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

JPMorgan

Chase Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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

36

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 1.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 3.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.7% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed 

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement.

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

not be withheld at this time.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

37

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 (%)

56%

17%

1%

67%

21%

4%

35%

13%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

82%

90%

79%

79%

90%

72%

82%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

10

7

36

11

8

39

11

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.5%

0.0%

3.7%

0.5%

0.0%

3.6%

0.5%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Ocwen Loan

Servicing, LLC

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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. 1Beginning in Q4 2011, Litton Loan Servicing, LP is reported with Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC on a consolidated basis. 
MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Compliance Results

38

OneWest Bank

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 3.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.5% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

39

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 (%)

56%

4%

1%

67%

10%

4%

35%

5%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

89%

90%

79%

82%

90%

72%

77%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

16

7

36

17

8

39

19

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

3.7%

0.0%

0.0%

3.6%

0.0%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

OneWest Bank

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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

40

Select Portfolio Servicing

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.0% 



< 10% 3.0% 



 - 



< 5% 3.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.5% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

First Quarter 2012

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

Select Portfolio Servicing has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines


MHA Servicer Assessment: 

Program Results

41

Select Portfolio Servicing

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

56%

7%

1%

67%

4%

4%

35%

5%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

89%

90%

79%

90%

90%

72%

90%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

7

7

36

8

8

39

9

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.2%

0.0%

3.7%

0.0%

0.0%

3.6%

0.1%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Select Portfolio

Servicing

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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

42

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Overview 

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

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

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

Performance Category Metric Benchmark Servicer Result Rating



< 4% 0.3% 



< 10% 0.0% 



 - 



< 5% 2.0% 



 - 



< 5% 0.2% 



 - 

Q1 Results

 Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 

 Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed

 Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated

 Rating Legend

 Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' 

eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a 

timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA 

activities.

Income Calculation Error %

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

the servicer's by more than 5%

Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines



Wells Fargo Bank, NA has areas requiring minor improvement.

 Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates 

appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners.

Second Look % Disagree

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

servicer's MHA determination

Second Look % Unable to Determine

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

the servicer's MHA determination

Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners

MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted 

effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines

First Quarter 2012

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

43

Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials

Conversion Rate for Trials Started

On or After 6/1/2010

Missing Modification Status Reports (%)

56%

12%

1%

67%

14%

4%

35%

12%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

82%

90%

90%

79%

89%

90%

72%

88%

90%

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

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

34

25

7

36

24

8

39

25

9

0 20 40 60

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

1.7%

0.1%

0.0%

3.7%

0.2%

0.0%

3.6%

0.5%

0.0%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Worst

Servicer

Performance

Wells Fargo

Bank, NA

Best

Servicer

Performance

Results as of:

 Sep. 2011

 Dec. 2011

 Mar. 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; trial 

modifications transferred are reflected in the current 

servicer’s population. 

Aged Trials as % of Active Trials: This monthly metric 

measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share 

of all active trials. These figures include trial 

modifications that have been converted to 

permanent modifications by the servicer and are 

pending reporting to the program system of record, 

plus some portion which may be canceled. 

Days to Resolve Escalated Cases: This cumulative 

metric measures servicer response time for 

homeowner inquiries escalated to MHA Support 

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

calendar days was established for non-GSE escalation 

cases, including an estimated 5 days processing by the 

MHA Support Centers. The methodology for 

calculating average days to respond to escalated 

cases was updated to only include non-GSE cases 

escalated on or after 2/1/2011. The Q4 2011 and Q1 

2012 figures exclude investor denial cases escalated 

prior to 11/1/2011; Q3 figures exclude all investor 

denial cases. 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.

44
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 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

Community Credit Union of Florida

CUC Mortgage Corporation

DuPage Credit Union

Fay Servicing, LLC

Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank

First Bank

First Financial Bank, N.A.

Franklin Credit Management 

Corporation

Franklin Savings

Fresno County Federal Credit Union

Glass City Federal Credit Union

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

Great Lakes Credit Union

Greater Nevada Mortgage Services

Green Tree Servicing LLC

Hartford Savings Bank

Hillsdale County National Bank

HomEq Servicing

HomeStar Bank & Financial Services

Homeward Residential2

Horicon Bank

Horizon Bank, NA

IBM Southeast Employees' Federal 

Credit Union

IC Federal Credit Union

Idaho Housing and Finance Association

iServe Residential Lending LLC

iServe Servicing Inc.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA3

Lake City Bank

Lake National 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

Park View Federal Savings Bank

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

Suburban Mortgage Company of New 

Mexico

Technology Credit Union

The Golden 1 Credit Union

U.S. Bank National Association

United Bank

United Bank Mortgage Corporation

Vantium Capital, Inc.

Vist Financial Corp.

Wealthbridge Mortgage Corp. 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA6

Yadkin Valley Bank

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

LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 Formerly American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA 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, NA includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. 

Appendix A1: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP

45
Making Home Affordable

Program Performance Report Through April 2012

Second Lien Modification Program (2MP)

Bank of America, NA1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc.

Community Credit Union of Florida

GMAC Mortgage, LLC 

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC

OneWest Bank

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

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

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP)

Amarillo National Bank

American Financial Resources Inc. 

Aurora Financial Group, Inc. 

Aurora Loan Services, LLC 

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico 

Bank of America, NA1

Capital International Financial, Inc. 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

CU Mortgage Services, Inc. 

First Federal Bank of Florida 

First Mortgage Corporation 

Franklin Savings 

Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

Green Tree Servicing LLC 

Guaranty Bank 

iServe Residential Lending, LLC 

iServe Servicing, Inc. 

James B. Nutter & Company 

JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA2

M&T Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Marsh Associates, Inc. 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC 

PNC Mortgage 3

RBC Bank (USA) 

Residential Credit Solutions 

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 

Schmidt Mortgage Company 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

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

Stockman Bank of Montana 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

Weststar Mortgage, Inc. 

FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP)

Bank of America, NA1

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC 

CitiMortgage, Inc. 

Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation 

GMAC Mortgage, LLC. 

Green Tree Servicing LLC

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

PNC Bank, National Association 

PNC Mortgage 3

Residential Credit Solutions 

Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. 

Select Portfolio Servicing 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

Rural Housing Service Modification Program 

(RD-HAMP)

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico

Bank of America, N.A. 1

Horicon Bank 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA 2

Magna Bank 

Marix Servicing, LLC 

Midland Mortgage Company 

Nationstar Mortgage LLC 

Wells Fargo Bank, NA 4

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

LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation.

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

Corporation. 

3 Formerly National City Bank.

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

Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs

46