144 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

A. Key Statistics

The FDIC’s Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan provide the basis for annual planning and

budgeting for needed resources. The 2009 aggregate budget (for corporate, receivership, and investment spending) was $2.57 billion, while actual expenditures for the year were $2.34 billion, about $1.11

billion more than 2008 expenditures.

Over the past decade, the FDIC’s expenditures have varied in response to workload. During the last

two years, expenditures have risen, largely due to increasing resolution and receivership activity. To

a lesser extent, increased expenses have resulted from supervision-related costs associated with the

oversight of more troubled institutions.

VI. Appendices

FDIC Expenditures 2000–2009

Dollars in Millions

$2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
VI. Appendices 145

Estimated Insured Deposits and the Deposit Insurance Fund,

December 31, 1934, through December 31, 20091

Dollars in Millions (except Insurance Coverage)

Deposits in Insured 

Institutions

Insurance Fund as a 

Percentage of 

Year 

Insurance 

Coverage2 

Total 

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured 

Deposits3 

Percentage 

of Insured 

Deposits 

Deposit 

Insurance

Fund 

Total

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured 

Deposits 

2009 $250,000 7,705,342 5,391,876 70.0 (20,861.8) (0.27) (0.39)

2008 100,000 7,505,360 4,756,809 63.4 17,276.3 0.23 0.36 

2007 100,000 6,921,686 4,292,163 62.0 52,413.0 0.76 1.22 

2006 100,000 6,640,105 4,153,786 62.6 50,165.3 0.76 1.21 

2005 100,000 6,229,764 3,890,941 62.5 48,596.6 0.78 1.25 

2004 100,000 5,724,621 3,622,059 63.3 47,506.8 0.83 1.31 

2003 100,000 5,223,922 3,452,497 66.1 46,022.3 0.88 1.33 

2002 100,000 4,916,078 3,383,598 68.8 43,797.0 0.89 1.29 

2001 100,000 4,564,064 3,215,581 70.5 41,373.8 0.91 1.29 

2000 100,000 4,211,895 3,055,108 72.5 41,733.8 0.99 1.37 

1999 100,000 3,885,826 2,869,208 73.8 39,694.9 1.02 1.38 

1998 100,000 3,817,150 2,850,452 74.7 39,452.1 1.03 1.38 

1997 100,000 3,602,189 2,746,477 76.2 37,660.8 1.05 1.37 

1996 100,000 3,454,556 2,690,439 77.9 35,742.8 1.03 1.33 

1995 100,000 3,318,595 2,663,873 80.3 28,811.5 0.87 1.08 

1994 100,000 3,184,410 2,588,619 81.3 23,784.5 0.75 0.92 

1993 100,000 3,220,302 2,602,781 80.8 14,277.3 0.44 0.55 

1992 100,000 3,275,530 2,677,709 81.7 178.4 0.01 0.01 

1991 100,000 3,331,312 2,733,387 82.1 (6,934.0) (0.21) (0.25) 

1990 100,000 3,415,464 2,784,838 81.5 4,062.7 0.12 0.15 

1989 100,000 3,412,503 2,755,471 80.7 13,209.5 0.39 0.48 

1988 100,000 2,337,080 1,756,771 75.2 14,061.1 0.60 0.80 

1987 100,000 2,198,648 1,657,291 75.4 18,301.8 0.83 1.10 

1986 100,000 2,162,687 1,636,915 75.7 18,253.3 0.84 1.12 

1985 100,000 1,975,030 1,510,496 76.5 17,956.9 0.91 1.19 

1984 100,000 1,805,334 1,393,421 77.2 16,529.4 0.92 1.19 

1983 100,000 1,690,576 1,268,332 75.0 15,429.1 0.91 1.22 

1982 100,000 1,544,697 1,134,221 73.4 13,770.9 0.89 1.21 

1981 100,000 1,409,322 988,898 70.2 12,246.1 0.87 1.24 

1980 100,000 1,324,463 948,717 71.6 11,019.5 0.83 1.16 
146 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Estimated Insured Deposits and the Deposit Insurance Fund,

December 31, 1934, through December 31, 20091

 (continued)

Dollars in Millions (except Insurance Coverage)

Deposits in Insured 

Institutions

Insurance Fund as a 

Percentage of 

Year 

Insurance 

Coverage2 

Total 

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured 

Deposits3 

Percentage 

of Insured 

Deposits 

Deposit 

Insurance

Fund 

Total

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured 

Deposits 

1979 40,000 1,226,943 808,555 65.9 9,792.7 0.80 1.21

1978 40,000 1,145,835 760,706 66.4 8,796.0 0.77 1.16

1977 40,000 1,050,435 692,533 65.9 7,992.8 0.76 1.15

1976 40,000 941,923 628,263 66.7 7,268.8 0.77 1.16

1975 40,000 875,985 569,101 65.0 6,716.0 0.77 1.18

1974 40,000 833,277 520,309 62.4 6,124.2 0.73 1.18

1973 20,000 766,509 465,600 60.7 5,615.3 0.73 1.21

1972 20,000 697,480 419,756 60.2 5,158.7 0.74 1.23

1971 20,000 610,685 374,568 61.3 4,739.9 0.78 1.27

1970 20,000 545,198 349,581 64.1 4,379.6 0.80 1.25

1969 20,000 495,858 313,085 63.1 4,051.1 0.82 1.29

1968 15,000 491,513 296,701 60.4 3,749.2 0.76 1.26

1967 15,000 448,709 261,149 58.2 3,485.5 0.78 1.33

1966 15,000 401,096 234,150 58.4 3,252.0 0.81 1.39

1965 10,000 377,400 209,690 55.6 3,036.3 0.80 1.45

1964 10,000 348,981 191,787 55.0 2,844.7 0.82 1.48

1963 10,000 313,304 177,381 56.6 2,667.9 0.85 1.50

1962 10,000 297,548 170,210 57.2 2,502.0 0.84 1.47

1961 10,000 281,304 160,309 57.0 2,353.8 0.84 1.47

1960 10,000 260,495 149,684 57.5 2,222.2 0.85 1.48

1959 10,000 247,589 142,131 57.4 2,089.8 0.84 1.47

1958 10,000 242,445 137,698 56.8 1,965.4 0.81 1.43

1957 10,000 225,507 127,055 56.3 1,850.5 0.82 1.46

1956 10,000 219,393 121,008 55.2 1,742.1 0.79 1.44

1955 10,000 212,226 116,380 54.8 1,639.6 0.77 1.41

1954 10,000 203,195 110,973 54.6 1,542.7 0.76 1.39

1953 10,000 193,466 105,610 54.6 1,450.7 0.75 1.37

1952 10,000 188,142 101,841 54.1 1,363.5 0.72 1.34

1951 10,000 178,540 96,713 54.2 1,282.2 0.72 1.33

1950 10,000 167,818 91,359 54.4 1,243.9 0.74 1.36
VI. Appendices 147

Estimated Insured Deposits and the Deposit Insurance Fund,

December 31, 1934, through December 31, 20091

 (continued)

Dollars in Millions (except Insurance Coverage)

Deposits in Insured 

Institutions

Insurance Fund as a 

Percentage of 

Year 

Insurance 

Coverage2 

Total 

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured 

Deposits3 

Percentage 

of Insured 

Deposits 

Deposit 

Insurance

Fund 

Total

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured 

Deposits 

1949 5,000 156,786 76,589 48.8 1,203.9 0.77 1.57

1948 5,000 153,454 75,320 49.1 1,065.9 0.69 1.42

1947 5,000 154,096 76,254 49.5 1,006.1 0.65 1.32

1946 5,000 148,458 73,759 49.7 1,058.5 0.71 1.44 

1945 5,000 157,174 67,021 42.6 929.2 0.59 1.39 

1944 5,000 134,662 56,398 41.9 804.3 0.60 1.43 

1943 5,000 111,650 48,440 43.4 703.1 0.63 1.45 

1942 5,000 89,869 32,837 36.5 616.9 0.69 1.88 

1941 5,000 71,209 28,249 39.7 553.5 0.78 1.96 

1940 5,000 65,288 26,638 40.8 496.0 0.76 1.86 

1939 5,000 57,485 24,650 42.9 452.7 0.79 1.84 

1938 5,000 50,791 23,121 45.5 420.5 0.83 1.82 

1937 5,000 48,228 22,557 46.8 383.1 0.79 1.70 

1936 5,000 50,281 22,330 44.4 343.4 0.68 1.54 

1935 5,000 45,125 20,158 44.7 306.0 0.68 1.52 

1934 5,000 40,060 18,075 45.1 291.7 0.73 1.61 

1

 Prior to 1989, figures are for BIF only and exclude insured branches of foreign banks. For 1989 to 2005, figures represent sum of BIF and SAIF amounts; for 

2006 to 2008, figures are for DIF. Amounts from 1989 to 2008 include insured branches of foreign banks. 

2

 Coverage for certain retirement accounts increased to $250,000 in 2006. Coverage limits do not reflect temporary increases authorized by the Emergency 

Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. Initial coverage limit was $2,500 from January 1 to June 30, 1934. 

3

 Prior to year-end 1991, insured deposits were estimated using percentages determined from June Call and Thrift Financial reports.
148 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Income and Expenses, Deposit Insurance Fund, from Beginning of Operations, 

September 11, 1933, through December 31, 2009 

Dollars in Millions

Income Expenses and Losses

Year Total

Assessment 

Income 

Assessment 

Credits

Investment 

and Other 

Sources 

Effective 

Assessment 

Rate1 Total 

Provision 

for Losses

Admin. 

and Oper. 

Expenses2 

Interest & 

Other Ins. 

Expenses 

Funding 

Transfer 

from the 

FSLIC 

Resolution 

Fund

Net Income 

(Loss) 

Total $142,396.6 $88,268.6 $11,391.0 $66,107.8 $164,264.5 $135,742.4 $18,138.9 $10,389.2 $139.5 ($21,728.4)

2009 24,706.4 $17,865.4 $148.0 6,989.0 0.2332% 60,709.0 $57,711.8 $1,271.1 $1,726.1 0 (36,002.6)

2008 7,306.3 4,410.4 1,445.9 4,341.8 0.0418% 44,339.5 41,838.8 1,033.5 1,467.2 0 (37,033.2) 

2007 3,196.2 3,730.9 3,088.0 2,553.3 0.0093% 1,090.9 95.0 992.6 3.3 0 2,105.3 

2006 2,643.5 31.9 0.0 2,611.6 0.0005% 904.3 (52.1) 950.6 5.8 0 1,739.2 

2005 2,420.5 60.9 0.0 2,359.6 0.0010% 809.3 (160.2) 965.7 3.8 0 1,611.2 

2004 2,240.3 104.2 0.0 2,136.1 0.0019% 607.6 (353.4) 941.3 19.7 0 1,632.7 

2003 2,173.6 94.8 0.0 2,078.8 0.0019% (67.7) (1,010.5) 935.5 7.3 0 2,241.3 

2002 1,795.9 107.8 0.0 2,276.9 0.0023% 719.6 (243.0) 945.1 17.5 0 1,076.3 

2001 2,730.1 83.2 0.0 2,646.9 0.0019% 3,123.4 2,199.3 887.9 36.2 0 (393.3) 

2000 2,570.1 64.3 0.0 2,505.8 0.0016% 945.2 28.0 883.9 33.3 0 1,624.9 

1999 2,416.7 48.4 0.0 2,368.3 0.0013% 2,047.0 1,199.7 823.4 23.9 0 369.7 

1998 2,584.6 37.0 0.0 2,547.6 0.0010% 817.5 (5.7) 782.6 40.6 0 1,767.1 

1997 2,165.5 38.6 0.0 2,126.9 0.0011% 247.3 (505.7) 677.2 75.8 0 1,918.2 

1996 7,156.8 5,294.2 0.0 1,862.6 0.1622% 353.6 (417.2) 568.3 202.5 0 6,803.2 

1995 5,229.2 3,877.0 0.0 1,352.2 0.1238% 202.2 (354.2) 510.6 45.8 0 5,027.0 

1994 7,682.1 6,722.7 0.0 959.4 0.2192% (1,825.1) (2,459.4) 443.2 191.1 0 9,507.2 

1993 7,354.5 6,682.0 0.0 672.5 0.2157% (6,744.4) (7,660.4) 418.5 497.5 0 14,098.9 

1992 6,479.3 5,758.6 0.0 720.7 0.1815% (596.8) (2,274.7) 614.83 1,063.1 35.4 7,111.5 

1991 5,886.5 5,254.0 0.0 632.5 0.1613% 16,925.3 15,496.2 326.1 1,103.0 42.4 (10,996.4) 

1990 3,855.3 2,872.3 0.0 983.0 0.0868% 13,059.3 12,133.1 275.6 650.6 56.1 (9,147.9) 

1989 3,496.6 1,885.0 0.0 1,611.6 0.0816% 4,352.2 3,811.3 219.9 321.0 5.6 (850.0) 

1988 3,347.7 1,773.0 0.0 1,574.7 0.0825% 7,588.4 6,298.3 223.9 1,066.2 0 (4,240.7) 

1987 3,319.4 1,696.0 0.0 1,623.4 0.0833% 3,270.9 2,996.9 204.9 69.1 0 48.5 

1986 3,260.1 1,516.9 0.0 1,743.2 0.0787% 2,963.7 2,827.7 180.3 (44.3) 0 296.4 

1985 3,385.5 1,433.5 0.0 1,952.0 0.0815% 1,957.9 1,569.0 179.2 209.7 0 1,427.6 

1984 3,099.5 1,321.5 0.0 1,778.0 0.0800% 1,999.2 1,633.4 151.2 214.6 0 1,100.3 

1983 2,628.1 1,214.9 164.0 1,577.2 0.0714% 969.9 675.1 135.7 159.1 0 1,658.2 

1982 2,524.6 1,108.9 96.2 1,511.9 0.0769% 999.8 126.4 129.9 743.5 0 1,524.8 

1981 2,074.7 1,039.0 117.1 1,152.8 0.0714% 848.1 320.4 127.2 400.5 0 1,226.6 

1980 1,310.4 951.9 521.1 879.6 0.0370% 83.6 (38.1) 118.2 3.5 0 1,226.8 
VI. Appendices 149

Income and Expenses, Deposit Insurance Fund, from Beginning of Operations, 

September 11, 1933, through December 31, 2009 (continued)

Dollars in Millions

Income Expenses and Losses

Year Total

Assessment 

Income 

Assessment 

Credits

Investment 

and Other 

Sources 

Effective 

Assessment 

Rate1 Total 

Provision 

for Losses

Admin. 

and Oper. 

Expenses2

Interest & 

Other Ins. 

Expenses 

Funding 

Transfer 

from the 

FSLIC 

Resolution 

Fund

Net Income 

(Loss) 

1979 1,090.4 881.0 524.6 734.0 0.0333% 93.7 (17.2) 106.8 4.1 0 996.7 

1978 952.1 810.1 443.1 585.1 0.0385% 148.9 36.5 103.3 9.1 0 803.2 

1977 837.8 731.3 411.9 518.4 0.0370% 113.6 20.8 89.3 3.5 0 724.2 

1976 764.9 676.1 379.6 468.4 0.0370% 212.3 28.0 180.4 4 3.9 0 552.6 

1975 689.3 641.3 362.4 410.4 0.0357% 97.5 27.6 67.7 2.2 0 591.8 

1974 668.1 587.4 285.4 366.1 0.0435% 159.2 97.9 59.2 2.1 0 508.9 

1973 561.0 529.4 283.4 315.0 0.0385% 108.2 52.5 54.4 1.3 0 452.8 

1972 467.0 468.8 280.3 278.5 0.0333% 59.7 10.1 49.6 6.0 5 0 407.3 

1971 415.3 417.2 241.4 239.5 0.0345% 60.3 13.4 46.9 0.0 0 355.0 

1970 382.7 369.3 210.0 223.4 0.0357% 46.0 3.8 42.2 0.0 0 336.7 

1969 335.8 364.2 220.2 191.8 0.0333% 34.5 1.0 33.5 0.0 0 301.3 

1968 295.0 334.5 202.1 162.6 0.0333% 29.1 0.1 29.0 0.0 0 265.9 

1967 263.0 303.1 182.4 142.3 0.0333% 27.3 2.9 24.4 0.0 0 235.7 

1966 241.0 284.3 172.6 129.3 0.0323% 19.9 0.1 19.8 0.0 0 221.1 

1965 214.6 260.5 158.3 112.4 0.0323% 22.9 5.2 17.7 0.0 0 191.7 

1964 197.1 238.2 145.2 104.1 0.0323% 18.4 2.9 15.5 0.0 0 178.7 

1963 181.9 220.6 136.4 97.7 0.0313% 15.1 0.7 14.4 0.0 0 166.8 

1962 161.1 203.4 126.9 84.6 0.0313% 13.8 0.1 13.7 0.0 0 147.3 

1961 147.3 188.9 115.5 73.9 0.0323% 14.8 1.6 13.2 0.0 0 132.5 

1960 144.6 180.4 100.8 65.0 0.0370% 12.5 0.1 12.4 0.0 0 132.1 

1959 136.5 178.2 99.6 57.9 0.0370% 12.1 0.2 11.9 0.0 0 124.4 

1958 126.8 166.8 93.0 53.0 0.0370% 11.6 0.0 11.6 0.0 0 115.2 

1957 117.3 159.3 90.2 48.2 0.0357% 9.7 0.1 9.6 0.0 0 107.6 

1956 111.9 155.5 87.3 43.7 0.0370% 9.4 0.3 9.1 0.0 0 102.5 

1955 105.8 151.5 85.4 39.7 0.0370% 9.0 0.3 8.7 0.0 0 96.8 

1954 99.7 144.2 81.8 37.3 0.0357% 7.8 0.1 7.7 0.0 0 91.9 

1953 94.2 138.7 78.5 34.0 0.0357% 7.3 0.1 7.2 0.0 0 86.9 

1952 88.6 131.0 73.7 31.3 0.0370% 7.8 0.8 7.0 0.0 0 80.8 

1951 83.5 124.3 70.0 29.2 0.0370% 6.6 0.0 6.6 0.0 0 76.9 

1950 84.8 122.9 68.7 30.6 0.0370% 7.8 1.4 6.4 0.0 0 77.0 
150 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Income and Expenses, Deposit Insurance Fund, from Beginning of Operations, 

September 11, 1933, through December 31, 2009 (continued)

Dollars in Millions

Income Expenses and Losses

Year Total

Assessment 

Income 

Assessment 

Credits

Investment 

and Other 

Sources 

Effective 

Assessment 

Rate1 Total 

Provision 

for Losses

Admin. 

and Oper. 

Expenses2

Interest & 

Other Ins. 

Expenses 

Funding 

Transfer 

from the 

FSLIC 

Resolution 

Fund

Net Income 

(Loss) 

1949 151.1 122.7 0.0 28.4 0.0833% 6.4 0.3 6.1 0.0 0 144.7 

1948 145.6 119.3 0.0 26.3 0.0833% 7.0 0.7 6.3 6 0.0 0 138.6 

1947 157.5 114.4 0.0 43.1 0.0833% 9.9 0.1 9.8 0.0 0 147.6 

1946 130.7 107.0 0.0 23.7 0.0833% 10.0 0.1 9.9 0.0 0 120.7 

1945 121.0 93.7 0.0 27.3 0.0833% 9.4 0.1 9.3 0.0 0 111.6 

1944 99.3 80.9 0.0 18.4 0.0833% 9.3 0.1 9.2 0.0 0 90.0 

1943 86.6 70.0 0.0 16.6 0.0833% 9.8 0.2 9.6 0.0 0 76.8 

1942 69.1 56.5 0.0 12.6 0.0833% 10.1 0.5 9.6 0.0 0 59.0 

1941 62.0 51.4 0.0 10.6 0.0833% 10.1 0.6 9.5 0.0 0 51.9 

1940 55.9 46.2 0.0 9.7 0.0833% 12.9 3.5 9.4 0.0 0 43.0 

1939 51.2 40.7 0.0 10.5 0.0833% 16.4 7.2 9.2 0.0 0 34.8 

1938 47.7 38.3 0.0 9.4 0.0833% 11.3 2.5 8.8 0.0 0 36.4 

1937 48.2 38.8 0.0 9.4 0.0833% 12.2 3.7 8.5 0.0 0 36.0 

1936 43.8 35.6 0.0 8.2 0.0833% 10.9 2.6 8.3 0.0 0 32.9 

1935 20.8 11.5 0.0 9.3 0.0833% 11.3 2.8 8.5 0.0 0 9.5 

1933-34 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 N/A 10.0 0.2 9.8 0.0 0 (3.0)

1

 Figures represent only BIF insured institutions prior to 1990, BIF and SAIF insured institutions from 1990 through 2005, and DIF insured institutions beginning in 2006. After 1995, all thrift 

closings became the responsibility of the FDIC and amounts are reflected in the SAIF. The effective assessment rate is calculated from annual assessment income (net of assessment credits) 

excluding transfers to the Financing Corporation (FICO), Resolution Funding Corporation (REFCORP) and the FSLIC Resolution Fund, divided by the four quarter average assessment base. 

The effective rates from 1950 through 1984 varied from the statutory rate of 0.0833 percent due to assessment credits provided in those years. The statutory rate increased to 0.12 percent 

in 1990 and to a minimum of 0.15 percent in 1991. The effective rates in 1991 and 1992 varied because the FDIC exercised new authority to increase assessments above the statutory 

minimum rate when needed. Beginning in 1993, the effective rate was based on a risk-related premium system under which institutions paid assessments in the range of 0.23 percent to 

0.31 percent. In May 1995, the BIF reached the mandatory recapitalization level of 1.25 percent. As a result, BIF assessment rates were reduced to a range of 0.04 percent to 0.31 percent of 

assessable deposits, effective June 1995, and assessments totaling $1.5 billion were refunded in September 1995. Assessment rates for BIF were lowered again to a range of 0 to 0.27 percent 

of assessable deposits, effective the start of 1996. In 1996, the SAIF collected a one-time special assessment of $4.5 billion. Subsequently, assessment rates for SAIF were lowered to the same 

range as BIF, effective October 1996. This range of rates remained unchanged for both funds through 2006. As part of the implementation of the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 

2005, assessment rates were increased to a range of 0.05 percent to 0.43 percent of assessable deposits effective at the start of 2007, but many institutions received a one-time assessment 

credit ($4.7 billion in total) to offset the new assessments.

2

 These expenses, which are presented as operating expenses in the Statements of Income and Fund Balance, pertain to the FDIC in its Corporate capacity only and do not include costs 

that are charged to the failed bank receiverships that are managed by the FDIC. The receivership expenses are presented as part of the “Receivables from Bank Resolutions, net” line on the 

Balance Sheets. The narrative and graph presented in the “Corporate Planning and Budget” section of this report (next page) show the aggregate (corporate and receivership) expenditures 

of the FDIC.

3

 Includes $210 million for the cumulative effect of an accounting change for certain postretirement benefits.

4

 Includes $105.6 million net loss on government securities.

5

 This amount represents interest and other insurance expenses from 1933 to 1972.

6

 Includes the aggregate amount of $80.6 million of interest paid on capital stock between 1933 and 1948
VI. Appendices 151

Number, Assets, Deposits, Losses, and Loss To Funds of Insured Thrifts Taken Over or Closed 

Because of Financial Difficulties, 1989 Through 19951

Dollars in Thousands

Year Total Assets Deposits 

Estimated 

Receivership Loss2 Loss to Funds3

Total 748 $393,986,574 $317,501,978 $75,315,686 $81,583,975 

1995 2 423,819 414,692 28,192 27,750 

1994 2 136,815 127,508 11,472 14,599 

1993 10 6,147,962 4,881,461 267,595 65,212 

1992 59 44,196,946 34,773,224 3,234,851 3,780,088 

1991 144 78,898,904 65,173,122 8,624,734 9,123,030 

1990 213 129,662,498 98,963,962 16,063,792 19,258,686 

19894 318 134,519,630 113,168,009 47,085,050 49,314,610 

1

 Beginning in 1989 through July 1, 1995, all thrift closings were the responsibility of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC). Since the RTC was terminated on December 31, 

1995, and all assets and liabilities transferred to the FSLIC Resolution Fund (FRF), all the results of the thrift closing activity from 1989 through 1995 are now reflected on 

FRF’s books. Year is the year of failure, not the year of resolution. 

2

 The estimated losses represent the projected loss at the fund level from receiverships for unreimbursed subrogated claims of the FRF and unpaid advances to 

receiverships from the FRF. 

3

 The Loss to Funds represents the total resolution cost of the failed thrifts in the FRF-RTC fund, which includes corporate revenue and expense items such as interest 

expense on Federal Financing Bank debt, interest expense on escrowed funds, and interest revenue on advances to receiverships, in addition to the estimated losses for 

receiverships. 

4

 Total for 1989 excludes nine failures of the former FSLIC. 
152 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Purchase and Assumption—Insured Deposits

Bank of Clark County

Vancouver, WA

NM 5,059 $441,085 $377,506 $389,930 $143,563 01/16/09 Umpqua Bank

Roseburg, OR

1st Centennial Bank

Redlands, CA

NM 8,453 $797,959 $678,570 $629,958 $156,663 01/23/09 First California Bank

Westlake Village, CA

Silverton Bank, NA

Atlanta, GA

N 1,368 $4,157,246 $3,314,928 $2,579,148 $484,909 05/01/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

Independent Bankers Bank

Springfield, IL

SM 604 $585,508 $511,473 $143,739 $35,088 12/18/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

Insured Deposits Transfer

Omni National Bank

Atlanta, GA

N 8,723 $979,585 $813,205 $839,583 $341,281 03/27/09 SunTrust Bank

Atlanta, GA

Whole Bank Purchase and Assumption—All Deposits

BankUnited, FSB

Coral Gables, FL

SB 246,732 $13,111,463 $8,775,985 $2,698,688 $5,568,945 05/21/09 BankUnited

Coral Gables, FL

National Bank of Commerce

Berkeley, IL

N 8,191 $419,741 $395,868 $141,800 $87,638 01/16/09 Republic Bank of Chicago

Oak Brook, IL

Suburban Federal Savings Bank

Crofton, MD

SB 14,900 $347,408 $301,847 $49,000 $109,329 01/30/09 Bank of Essex

Tappahannock, VA

County Bank

Merced, CA

SM 84,185 $1,711,552 $1,324,635 $20,000 $131,778 02/06/09 Westamerica Bank

San Rafael, CA

Alliance Bank

Culver City, CA

NM 9,213 $1,113,361 $951,106 $71,989 $207,769 02/06/09 California Bank & Trust

San Diego, CA

Pinnacle Bank

Beaverton, OR

NM 1,444 $71,921 $64,168 $10,000 $14,336 02/13/09 Washington Trust Bank

Spokane, WA

Heritage Community Bank

Glenwood, IL

NM 11,764 $235,154 $225,735 $23,520 $39,235 02/27/09 MB Financial Bank, N.A.

Glenwood, IL

Freedom Bank of Georgia

Commerce, GA

NM 5,081 $172,454 $159,048 $13,385 $40,057 03/06/09 Northeast Georgia Bank

Lavonia, GA

Colorado National Bank

Colorado Springs, CO

N 4,799 $123,508 $85,150 $6,700 $16,097 03/20/09 Herring Bank

Amarillo, TX

Teambank, N.A.

Paola, KS

N 36,698 $669,830 $532,520 $75,713 $105,699 03/20/09 Great Southern Bank

Springfield, MO

Cape Fear Bank

Wilmington, NC

NM 10,867 $492,418 $402,820 $118,791 $125,365 04/10/09 First FS&LA of Charleston

Charleston, SC
VI. Appendices 153

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Great Basin Bank of Nevada

Elko, NV

NM 13,178 $238,940 $220,834 $20,810 $19,592 04/17/09 Nevada State Bank

Las Vegas, NV

American Sterling Bank

Sugar Creek, MO

SB 10,222 $166,456 $170,946 $21,800 $46,043 04/17/09 Metcalf Bank

Lee’s Summit, MO

Strategic Capital Bank

Champaign, IL

NM 1,713 $546,576 $479,384 $61,000 $145,291 05/22/09 Midland States Bank

Effingham, IL

Citizens National Bank

Macomb, IL

N 13,607 $438,560 $393,635 $201,244 $25,999 05/22/09 Morton Community Bank

Morton, IL

Bank of Lincolnwood

Lincolnwood, IL

NM 8,003 $212,718 $209,285 $87,587 $66,854 06/05/09 Republic Bank of Chicago

Oak Brook, IL

Cooperative Bank

Wilmington, NC

NM 29,001 $966,778 $768,479 $51,699 $270,651 06/19/09 First Bank

Troy, NC

The First National Bank of 

Anthony

Anthony, KS

N 9,326 $156,954 $142,551 $12,622 $32,532 06/19/09 Bank of Kansas

South Hutchinson, KS

Southern Community Bank

Fayetteville, GA

NM 13,372 $371,695 $297,962 $99,190 $103,941 06/19/09 United Community Bank

Blairsville, GA

Neighborhood Community 

Bank

Newnan, GA

SM 7,067 $212,616 $190,070 $46,720 $70,663 06/26/09 CharterBank

West Point, GA

Horizon Bank

Pine City, MN

NM 4,823 $84,763 $69,254 $10,532 $22,825 06/26/09 Stearns Bank, N.A.

St. Cloud, MN

MetroPacific Bank

Irvine, CA

NM 709 $75,316 $70,078 $38,367 $31,887 06/26/09 Sunwest Bank

Tustin, CA

Mirae Bank

Los Angeles, CA

NM 6,385 $480,619 $409,951 $10,500 $59,962 06/26/09 Wilshire State Bank

Los Angeles, CA

The Elizabeth State Bank

Elizabeth, IL

NM 4,761 $55,027 $48,131 $5,495 $12,274 07/02/09 Galena State Bank and

Trust

Galena, IL

Founders Bank

Worth, IL

NM 48,969 $889,172 $832,160 $77,038 $129,972 07/02/09 The PrivateBank and Trust 

Company

Chicago, IL

Rock River Bank

Oregon, IL

NM 4,633 $74,808 $74,893 $12,043 $24,880 07/02/09 The Harvard State Bank

Harvard, IL

The John Warner Bank

Clinton, IL

NM 6,487 $69,609 $65,179 $7,515 $13,180 07/02/09 State Bank of Lincoln

Lincoln, IL

First State Bank of Winchester

Winchester, IL

NM 3,362 $30,073 $30,806 $2,410 $7,492 07/02/09 The First National Bank of 

Beardstown

Beardstown, IL

First National Bank of Danville

Danville, IL

N 12,698 $148,218 $140,185 $19,400 $22,233 07/02/09 First Financial Bank, N.A.

Terre Haute, IN
154 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Millennium State Bank of Texas 

Dallas, TX

NM 1,646 $118,601 $115,478 $54,860 $51,863 07/02/09 State Bank of Texas

Irving, TX

Temecula Valley Bank

Temecula, CA

NM 22,684 $1,396,622 $1,276,287 $263,324 $382,418 07/17/09 First-Citizens Bank and

Trust Company

Raleigh, NC

Vineyard Bank, N.A.

Corona, CA

N 37,539 $1,638,378 $1,526,186 $165,552 $572,830 07/17/09 California Bank & Trust

San Diego, CA

First Piedmont Bank

Winder, GA

NM 3,705 $114,113 $108,499 $6,750 $31,994 07/17/09 First American Bank and 

Trust Company

Athens, GA

Security Bank of Bibb County

Macon, GA

NM 35,441 $943,744 $831,437 $347,100 $370,351 07/24/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Pinehurst, GA

Security Bank of Gwinnett

County

Suwanee, GA

NM 3,646 $259,182 $256,578 $71,540 $135,047 07/24/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Pinehurst, GA

Security Bank of Houston 

County

Perry, GA

NM 16,221 $371,624 $313,155 $12,500 $44,695 07/24/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Pinehurst, GA

Security Bank of Jones County

Gray, GA

NM 12,294 $432,712 $375,238 $11,800 $62,196 07/24/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Pinehurst, GA

Security Bank of North Fulton

Alpharetta, GA

NM 3,398 $190,564 $179,523 $16,567 $41,321 07/24/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Pinehurst, GA

Security Bank of North Metro

Woodstock, GA

NM 2,802 $184,184 $182,413 $33,081 $72,116 07/24/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Pinehurst, GA

Waterford Village Bank

Clarence, NY

NM 1,873 $55,707 $56,145 $6,600 $12.154 07/24/09 Evans Bank, NA

Angola, NY

Community First Bank

Prineville, OR

SM 11,345 $199,508 $180,691 $46,969 $60,410 08/07/09 Home Federal Bank 

Nampa, ID

First State Bank of Altus

Altus, OK

NM 7,901 $90,867 $98,161 $36,825 $18,030 07/31/09 Herring Bank

Amarillo, TX

Mutual Bank

Harvey, IL

NM 34,851 $1,595,657 $1,546,525 $348,400 $656,151 07/31/09 United Central Bank

Garland, TX

Peoples Community Bank

West Chester, OH

SB 37,951 $606,153 $538,787 $37,300 $135,480 07/31/09 First Financial Bank, N.A.

Hamilton, OH

First Bankamericano

Elizabeth, NJ

NM 7,085 $163,372 $155,463 $16,340 $16,139 07/31/09 Crown Bank

Brick, NJ
VI. Appendices 155

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Community National Bank of 

Sarasota County

Venice, FL

N 5,807 $92,528 $92,352 $15,375 $26,456 08/07/09 Stearns Bank, N.A.

St. Cloud, MN

First State Bank of Sarasota

Sarasota, FL

NM 12,193 $447,667 $394,701 $54,896 $124,608 08/07/09 Stearns Bank, N.A.

St. Cloud, MN

Community Bank of Arizona

Phoenix, AZ

NM 2,022 $158,517 $143,834 $24,566 $27,892 08/14/09 MidFirst Bank

Oklahoma City, OK

Colonial Bank

Montgomery, AL

NM 756,514 $25,455,112 $20,020,047 $3,983,800 $3,810,331 08/14/09 Branch Banking and Trust 

(BB&T)

Winston-Salem, NC

Guaranty Bank

Austin, TX

SB 577,832 $13,464,352 $11,984,112 $2,454,739 $2,737,425 08/21/09 BBVA Compass

Birmingham, AL

Capital South Bank

Birmingham, AL

SM 18,031 $586,586 $539,422 $80,191 $162,355 08/21/09 Iberiabank 

Lafeyette, LA

ebank

Atlanta, GA

SB 3,914 $144,688 $131,510 $21,298 $68,164 08/21/09 Stearns Bank, N.A.

St. Cloud, MN

First Coweta Bank

Newnan, GA

NM 6,015 $163,755 $154,903 $152,856 $50,082 08/21/09 United Bank

Zebulon, GA

Bradford Bank

Baltimore, MD

SB 18,354 $451,888 $382,159 $37,338 $92,252 08/28/09 Manufacturers and Traders 

Trust Company

Buffalo, NY

Affinity Bank

Ventura, CA

NM 19,710 $1,211,431 $905,593 $124,371 $266,609 08/28/09 Pacific Western Bank

San Diego, CA

Mainstreet Bank

Forest Lake, MN

NM 21,832 $458,533 $432,818 $46,414 $97,859 08/28/09 Central Bank

Stillwater, MN

First Bank of Kansas City

Kansas City, MO

NM 701 $15,723 $14,479 $16,489 $7,244 09/04/09 Great American Bank

De Soto, KS

InBank

Oak Forest, IL

NM 9,941 $209,848 $209,211 $58,588 $53,690 09/04/09 MB Financial Bank, N.A.

Chicago, IL

First State Bank—Flagstaff

Flagstaff, AZ

SM 4,516 $107,235 $95,734 $99,504 $47,358 09/04/09 Sunwest Bank

Tustin, CA

Vantus Bank

Sioux City, IA

SB 43,421 $503,643 $394,369 $133,300 $99,458 09/04/09 Great Southern Bank

Springfield, MO

Brickwell Community Bank

Woodbury, MN

NM 1,657 $72,576 $64,981 $4,783 $27,074 09/11/09 CorTrust Bank, NA

Mitchell, SD

Venture Bank

Lacey, WA

NM 37,005 $968,385 $917,729 $188,485 $239,762 09/11/09 First-Citizens Bank & Trust

Raleigh, NC

Irwin Union Bank & Trust Co.

Columbus, IN

SM 62,735 $2,839,747 $2,254,025 $850,000 $608,072 09/18/09 First Financial Bank, NA

Hamilton, OH
156 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Irwin Union, FSB

Louisville, KY

SB 9,356 $518,151 $462,611 $113,200 $125,763 09/18/09 First Financial Bank, NA

Hamilton, OH

Georgian Bank

Atlanta, GA

NM 12,548 $2,230,230 $1,960,123 $543,754 $804,828 09/25/09 First Citizens Bank & Trust,

Inc.

Columbia, SC

Southern Colorado National 

Bank

Pueblo, CO

N 1,206 $37,142 $29,568 $4,619 $9,889 10/02/09 Legacy Bank

Wiley, CO

Jennings State Bank

Spring Grove, MN

NM 4,966 $52,347 $50,801 $9,653 $18,159 10/02/09 Central Bank

Stillwater, MN

San Joaquin Bank

Bakersfield, CA

SM 10,068 $766,359 $626,359 $49,252 $94,572 10/16/09 Citizens Business Bank

Ontario, CA

American United Bank

Lawrenceville, GA

NM 1,950 $110,094 $102,386 $17,100 $45,210 10/23/09 Ameris Bank

Moultrie, GA

First DuPage Bank

Westomont, IL

SM 5,851 $262,093 $253,992 $22,423 $63,667 10/23/09 First Midwest Bank

Itasca, IL

Flagship National Bank

Bradenton, FL

N 6,069 $177,563 $170,118 $34,200 $63,623 10/23/09 First Federal Bank of Florida

Lake City, FL

Partners Bank

Naples, FL

SB 1,503 $65,498 $64,798 $34,034 $32,770 10/23/09 Stonegate Bank

Fort Lauderdale, FL

Bank of Elmwood

Racine, WI

SM 15,958 $327,444 $272,782 $112,248 $88,364 10/23/09 Tri City National Bank

Oak Creek, WI

Riverview Community Bank

Ostego, MN

NM 3,398 $99,057 $75,012 $9,148 $23,899 10/23/09 Central Bank

Stillwater, MN

California National Bank

Los Angeles, CA

N 216,381 $7,781,100 $6,145,207 $105,700 $956,535 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

San Diego National Bank

San Diego, CA

N 74,941 $3,594,544 $2,891,544 $119,813 $353,117 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Bank USA, N.A.

Phoenix, AZ

N 1,810 $213,205 $170,685 $3,700 $19,947 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Community Bank of Lemont

Lemont, IL

NM 2,871 $81,843 $80,688 $6,096 $24,095 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

North Houston Bank

Houston, TX

NM 11,645 $325,474 $307,166 $17,500 $42,670 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Pacific National Bank

San Francisco, CA

N 48,770 $2,319,263 $1,757,986 $79,000 $223,360 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Park National Bank

Chicago, IL

N 174,506 $4,680,881 $3,716,626 $0 $628,737 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN
VI. Appendices 157

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Citizens National Bank

Teague, TX

N 3,781 $118,236 $97,590 $6,300 $24,717 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Madisonville State Bank

Madisonville, TX

NM 8,410 $256,330 $224,653 $8,215 $27,452 10/30/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Prosperan Bank

Oakdale, MN

NM 8,204 $197,442 $182,794 $35,106 $53,196 11/06/09 Alerus Financial, N.A.

Grand Forks, ND

Home Federal Savings Bank

Detroit, MI

SB 2,477 $12,994 $12,730 $6,270 $7,902 11/06/09 Liberty Bank and Trust 

Company

New Orleans, LA

United Security Bank

Sparta, GA

NM 4,807 $153,639 $149,616 $31,757 $64,949 11/06/09 Ameris Bank

Moultrie, GA

Gateway Bank of St. Louis

Saint Louis, MO

NM 1,818 $26,882 $27,534 $10,054 $11,729 11/06/09 Central Bank of Kansas City

Kansas City, MO

United Commercial Bank

San Francisco, CA

NM 290,762 $10,895,336 $6,937,677 $849,926 $1,451,767 11/06/09 East West Bank

Pasadena, CA

Century Bank, FSB

Sarasota, FL

SB 27,349 $755,923 $659,742 $106,444 $282,096 11/13/09 Iberiabank

Lafayette, LA

Orion Bank

Naples, FL

SM 30,766 $2,612,515 $2,169,446 $496,404 $630,873 11/13/09 Iberiabank

Lafayette, LA

Pacific Coast, N.B.

San Clemente, CA

N 2,338 $131,418 $128,867 $29,096 $30,637 11/13/09 Sunwest Bank

Tustin, CA

Commerce Bank of Southwest 

Florida

Fort Myers, FL

NM 2,005 $70,997 $72,821 $2,575 $28,241 11/20/09 Central Bank

Stillwater, MN

The Buckhead Community Bank

Atlanta, GA

NM 17,403 $856,236 $813,668 $63,705 $241,187 12/04/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Macon, GA

The Tattnall Bank

Reidsville, GA

NM 3,434 $49,612 $47,100 $14,703 $17,184 12/04/09 HeritageBank of the South

Albany, GA

Benchmark Bank

Aurora, IL

NM 5,234 $173,062 $182,760 $42,969 $69,948 12/04/09 MB Financial Bank, N.A.

Chicago, IL

Amtrust Bank

Cleveland, OH

SB 460,174 $11,438,990 $8,558,609 $3,035,000 $2,340,668 12/04/09 New York Community Bank

Westbury, NY

Greater Atlantic Bank

Reston, VA

SB 8,008 $203,262 $179,248 $29,800 $37,602 12/04/09 Sonabank

McLean, VA

First Security National Bank

Norcross, GA

N 3,994 $127,455 $121,645 $17,638 $30,125 12/04/09 State Bank and Trust 

Company

Macon, GA
158 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Republic Federal Bank, N.A.

Miami, FL

N 7,318 $433,011 $352,695 $167,564 $109,371 12/11/09 1st United Bank

Boca Raton, FL

Valley Capital Bank, N.A.

Mesa, AZ

N 758 $40,270 $41,312 $0 $9,844 12/11/09 Enterprise Bank & Trust

Clayton, MO

SolutionsBank

Overland Park, KS

SM 10,137 $511,103 $421,271 $21,156 $112,521 12/11/09 Arvest Bank

Fayetteville, AR

Imperial Capital Bank

La Jolla, CA

NM 35,400 $4,046,888 $2,822,300 $726,843 $487,912 12/18/09 City National Bank

Los Angeles, CA

New South Federal Savings 

Bank

Irondale, AL

SB 20,968 $1,464,127 $1,163,916 $86,350 $223,592 12/18/09 Beal Bank

Plano, TX

Peoples First Community Bank

Panama City, FL

SB 81,612 $1,795,420 $1,684,443 $294,000 $484,327 12/18/09 Hancock Bank

Gulfport, MS

First Federal Bank of California, 

FSB

Santa Monica, CA

SB 135,555 $6,143,903 $4,538,607 $0 $158,115 12/18/09 OneWest Bank, FSB

Pasadena, CA

Purchase and Assumption—All Deposits

Ocala National Bank

Ocala, FL

N 10,663 $219,424 $204,663 $215,695 $93,239 01/30/09 CenterState Bank of Florida

Winter Haven, FL

FirstBank Financial Services

McDonough, GA

NM 6,245 $317,237 $279,308 $299,078 $126,255 02/06/09 Regions Bank

Birmingham, AL

Corn Belt Bank and Trust 

Company

Pittsfield, IL

NM 4,520 $260,201 $233,788 $234,458 $79,498 02/13/09 The Carlinville National 

Bank

Carlinville, IL

Riverside Bank of the Gulf Coast

Cape Coral, FL

SM 24,518 $523,673 $422,708 $462,057 $203,865 02/13/09 TIB Bank

Naples, FL

Sherman County Bank

Loup City, NE

NM 5,009 $135,431 $90,647 $114,150 $43,442 02/13/09 Heritage Bank

Wood River, NE

Silver Falls Bank

Silverton, OR

NM 4,476 $134,206 $115,976 $118,660 $52,539 02/20/09 Citizens Bank

Corvallis, OR

Security Savings Bank

Henderson, NV

NM 3,927 $238,307 $174,872 $180,418 $69,679 02/27/09 Bank of Nevada

Las Vegas, NV

American Southern Bank

Kennesaw, GA

NM 1,024 $105,950 $105,940 $108,784 $36,285 04/24/09 Bank of North Georgia

Alpharetta, GA

First Bank of Idaho, FSB

Ketchum, ID

SB 15,195 $490,656 $370,580 $438,920 $171,135 04/24/09 U.S. Bank, NA

Minneapolis, MN

Michigan Heritage Bank

Farmington Hills, MI

SM 3,159 $167,710 $149,065 $144,922 $55,953 04/24/09 Level One Bank

Farmington Hills, MI
VI. Appendices 159

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

America West Bank

Layton, UT

NM 1,909 $281,564 $286,040 $300,259 $125,477 05/01/09 Cache Valley Bank

Logan, UT

Citizens Community Bank

Ridgewood, NJ

NM 1,099 $40,657 $40,664 $40,082 $17,931 05/01/09 North Jersey Community 

Bank

Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Westsound Bank

Bremerton, WA

NM 11,814 $334,608 $304,464 $283,655 $107,122 05/08/09 Kitsap Bank

Port Orchard, WA

Bank of Wyoming

Thermopolis, WY

NM 2,866 $70,188 $66,598 $64,882 $30,480 07/10/09 Central Bank & Trust

Lander, WY

BankFirst

Sioux Falls, SD

SM 4,185 $210,844 $232,203 $218,222 $77,943 07/17/09 Alerus Financial, N.A.

Grand Forks, ND

Integrity Bank

Jupiter, FL

NM 2,293 $105,298 $98,511 $93,134 $38,351 07/31/09 Stonegate Bank

Fort Lauderdale, FL

Union Bank, N.A.

Gilbert, AZ

N 2,526 $119,529 $110,362 $110,785 $52,996 08/14/09 MidFirst Bank

Oklahoma City, OK

Dwelling House Savings & Loan

Pittsburgh, PA

SB 4,285 $12,947 $12,984 $12,690 $9,722 08/14/09 PNC Bank, N.A.

Pittsburgh, PA

Corus Bank, NA

Chicago, IL

N 154,011 $7,003,321 $7,060,693 $4,047,049 $946,457 09/11/09 MB Financial Bank, NA

Chicago, IL

Warren Bank

Warren, MI

SM 12,104 $504,816 $467,767 $464,729 $240,075 10/02/09 The Huntington National 

Bank

Columbus, OH

Hillcrest Bank Florida

Naples, FL

NM 1,535 $82,774 $83,254 $85,334 $31,448 10/23/09 Stonegate Bank

Fort Lauderdale, FL

Insured Deposit Payoffs

New Frontier Bank

Greeley, CO

NM 30,791 $1,774,588 $1,496,347 $1,667,720 $860,709 04/10/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

Citizens State Bank

New Baltimore, MI

NM 16,262 $168,551 $157,149 $111,826 $30,660 12/18/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation 

Community Bank of Nevada

Las Vegas, NV

SM $25,906 $1,397,798 $1,372,744 $1,306,797 $742,411 08/14/09 Deposit Insurance Bank 

of Las Vegas

Magnetbank

Salt Lake City, UT

NM 25 $300,674 $282,578 $277,788 $155,393 01/30/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

FirstCity Bank

Stockbridge, GA

NM 3,621 $285,015 $259,056 $290,553 $122,641 03/20/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

First Bank of Beverly Hills

Calabasas, CA

NM 1,203 $1,260,354 $866,492 $1,076,009 $352,190 04/24/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation
160 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Fdic-Insured Institutions Closed During 2009 (continu

Dollars in Thousands 

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets2

Total 

Deposits2

FDIC 

Disbursements3Estimated 

Loss1

Date of 

Closing or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming

Bank and Location

Community Bank of West 

Georgia

Villa Rica, GA

SM 4,140 $201,222 $189,398 $196,961 $86,224 06/26/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

Platinum Community Bank

Rolling Meadows, IL

SB 2,946 $147,961 $110,186 $272,361 $95,683 09/04/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

Rockbridge Commerical Bank

Atlanta, GA

NM 2,175 $294,024 $291,707 $259,576 $99,449 12/18/09 Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation

Codes for Bank Class:

NM = State-chartered bank that is not a member of the Federal Reserve System

N = National Bank

SB = Savings Bank

SM = State-chartered bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System

SA = Savings Association 1

 Estimated losses are as of 12/31/09. Estimated losses are routinely adjusted with updated information from new appraisals and asset sales, which ultimately affect the 

asset values and projected recoveries.

2

 Total Assets and Total Deposits data is based upon the last Call Report filed by the institution prior to failure.

3

 Represents corporate cash disbursements.
VI. Appendices 161

Recoveries and Losses by the Deposit Insurance Fund on Disbursements for the 

Protection of Depositors, 1934–2009 

Bank and Thrift Failures3

Dollars in Thousands

Year1

Number 

of Banks/

Thrifts Total Assets Total Deposits

Insured Deposit 

Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements Recoveries

Estimated 

Additional 

Recoveries

Estimated 

Losses

2,260 $786,995,568 $574,449,063 $434,150,618 $309,778,647 $34,030,548 $90,341,423 

20094 140 169,709,160 137,067,132 134,805,303 64,484,333 32,946,066 37,374,904 

20084 25 371,945,480 234,321,715 194,075,587 173,798,116 445,081 19,832,390 

2007 3 2,614,928 2,424,187 1,909,546 1,338,239 360,572 210,735 

2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2004 4 170,099 156,733 138,895 134,978 0 3,917 

2003 3 947,317 901,978 883,772 812,933 8,192 62,647

2002 11 2,872,720 2,512,834 2,068,519 1,630,631 66,228 371,660 

2001 4 1,821,760 1,661,214 1,605,147 1,113,270 181,417 310,460 

2000 7 410,160 342,584 297,313 265,175 0 32,138 

1999 8 1,592,189 1,320,573 1,307,045 685,154 7,409 614,482 

1998 3 290,238 260,675 286,678 52,248 11,799 222,631 

1997 1 27,923 27,511 25,546 20,520 0 5,026 

1996 6 232,634 230,390 201,533 140,918 0 60,615 

1995 6 802,124 776,387 609,043 524,571 0 84,472 

1994 13 1,463,874 1,397,018 1,224,769 1,045,718 0 179,051 

1993 41 3,828,939 3,509,341 3,841,658 3,209,012 0 632,646 

1992 120 45,357,237 39,921,310 14,173,886 10,499,860 3 3,674,023 

1991 124 64,556,512 52,972,034 21,190,376 15,194,017 3,781 5,992,578 

1990 168 16,923,462 15,124,454 10,812,484 8,040,995 0 2,771,489 

1989 206 28,930,572 24,152,468 11,443,281 5,247,995 0 6,195,286 

1988 200 38,402,475 26,524,014 10,432,655 5,055,158 0 5,377,497

1987 184 6,928,889 6,599,180 4,876,994 3,014,502 0 1,862,492 

1986 138 7,356,544 6,638,903 4,632,121 2,949,583 0 1,682,538 

1985 116 3,090,897 2,889,801 2,154,955 1,506,776 0 648,179 
162 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Recoveries and Losses by the Deposit Insurance Fund on Disbursements for the 

Protection of Depositors, 1934–2009 (continued)

Bank and Thrift Failures3 (continued)

Dollars in Thousands

Year1

Number 

of Banks/

Thrifts Total Assets Total Deposits

Insured Deposit 

Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements Recoveries

Estimated 

Additional 

Recoveries

Estimated 

Losses

1984 78 2,962,179 2,665,797 2,165,036 1,641,157 0 523,879 

1983 44 3,580,132 2,832,184 3,042,392 1,973,037 0 1,069,355 

1982 32 1,213,316 1,056,483 545,612 419,825 0 125,787 

1981 7 108,749 100,154 114,944 105,956 0 8,988 

1980 10 239,316 219,890 152,355 121,675 0 30,680 

1934 

–1979 558 8,615,743 5,842,119 5,133,173 4,752,295 0 380,878

Assistance Transactions

Dollars in Thousands

154 $3,317,099,253 $1,442,173,417 $11,630,356 $6,199,875 $0 $5,430,481 

20092 8 1,917,482,183 1,090,318,282 0 0 0 0

20082 5 1,306,041,994 280,806,966 0 0 0 0 

2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
VI. Appendices 163

Recoveries and Losses by the Deposit Insurance Fund on Disbursements for the 

Protection of Depositors, 1934–2009 (continued)

Assistance Transactions (continued)

Dollars in Thousands

Year1

Number 

of Banks/

Thrifts Total Assets Total Deposits Disbursements Recoveries

Estimated 

Additional 

Recoveries

Estimated 

Losses

1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

1992 2 33,831 33,117 1,486 1,236 0 250 

1991 3 78,524 75,720 6,117 3,093 0 3,024 

1990 1 14,206 14,628 4,935 2,597 0 2,338 

1989 1 4,438 6,396 2,548 252 0 2,296 

1988 80 15,493,939 11,793,702 1,730,351 189,709 0 1,540,642 

1987 19 2,478,124 2,275,642 160,877 713 0 160,164 

1986 7 712,558 585,248 158,848 65,669 0 93,179 

1985 4 5,886,381 5,580,359 765,732 406,676 0 359,056 

1984 2 40,470,332 29,088,247 5,531,179 4,414,904 0 1,116,275 

1983 4 3,611,549 3,011,406 764,690 427,007 0 337,683 

1982 10 10,509,286 9,118,382 1,729,538 686,754 0 1,042,784 

1981 3 4,838,612 3,914,268 774,055 1,265 0 772,790 

1980 1 7,953,042 5,001,755 0 0 0 0 

1934 

–1979 4 1,490,254 549,299 0 0 0 0 

1

 For 1990 through 2005, amounts represent the sum of BIF and SAIF failures (excluding those handled by the RTC); prior to 1990, figures are only for BIF. 

After 1995, all thrift closings became the responsibility of the FDIC and amounts are reflected in the SAIF. For 2006 to 2009, figures are for DIF. Assets and 

deposit data are based on the last Call or TFR Report filed before failure.

2

 Includes institutions where assistance was provided under a systemic risk determination. Any costs that exceed the amounts estimated under the least 

cost resolution requirement would be recovered through a special assessment on all FDIC-insured institutions.

3

 Institutions closed by the FDIC, including deposit payoff, insured deposit transfer, and deposit assumption cases.

4

 Includes transaction account coverage under the Transaction Account Guarantee Program.
164 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

FDIC Actions on Financial Institutions Applications 2007–2009

2009 2008 2007

Deposit Insurance 19 123 215

Approved* 19 123 215

Denied 0 0 0

New Branches 521 1,012 1,480

Approved 521 1,012 1,480

Denied 0 0 0

Mergers 190 275 306

Approved 190 275 306

Denied 0 0 0

Requests for Consent to Serve1 503 283 177

Approved 503 283 177

Section 19 20 8 24

Section 32 483 275 153

Denied 0 0 0

Section 19 0 0 0

Section 32 0 0 0

Notices of Change in Control 18 28 17

Letters of Intent Not to Disapprove 18 28 15

Disapproved 0 0 2

Broker Deposit Waivers 35 38 22

Approved 34 38 22

Denied 1 0 0

Savings Association Activities2 39 45 54

Approved 39 45 54

Denied 0 0 0

State Bank Activities/Investments3 2 11 21

Approved 2 11 21

Denied 0 0 0

Conversion of Mutual Institutions 6 10 10

Non-Objection 6 10 10

Objection 0 0 0

* Of the 19 reported in 2009, 11 are de novo applications. There were 101 and 191 de novo applications approved in 2008 and 2007, respectively. 1

 Under Section 19 of the Federal Deposit Insurance (FDI) Act, an insured institution must receive FDIC approval before employing a person 

convicted of dishonesty or breach of trust. Under Section 32, the FDIC must approve any change of directors or senior executive officers at a 

state non-member bank that is not in compliance with capital requirements or is otherwise in troubled condition. 

2

 Amendments to Part 303 of the FDIC Rules and Regulations changed FDIC oversight responsibility in October 1998. In 1998, Part 303 changed 

the Delegations of Authority to act upon applications. 

3

 Section 24 of the FDI Act, in general, precludes a federally-insured state bank from engaging in an activity not permissible for a national bank 

and requires notices to be filed with the FDIC.
VI. Appendices 165

Compliance, Enforcement, and Other Related Legal Actions 2007–2009

2009 2008 2007

Total Number of Actions Initiated by the FDIC 551 273 205

Termination of Insurance

Involuntary Termination

Sec. 8a For Violations, Unsafe/Unsound Practices or Conditions 0 0 0

Voluntary Termination

Sec. 8a By Order Upon Request 0 1 0

Sec. 8p No Deposits 4 2 2

Sec. 8q Deposits Assumed 2 1 4

Sec. 8b Cease-and-Desist Actions

Notices of Charges Issued1,3 3 1 3

Consent Orders 302 97 48

Sec. 8e Removal/Prohibition of Director or Officer

Notices of Intention to Remove/Prohibit 2 4 1

Consent Orders 64 62 40

Sec. 8g Suspension/Removal When Charged With Crime 0 0 0

Civil Money Penalties Issued

Sec. 7a Call Report Penalties 1 0 0

Sec. 8i Civil Money Penalties 154 98 96

Sec. 10c Orders of Investigation 10 2 7

Sec. 19 Denials of Service After Criminal Conviction 0 0 0

Sec. 32 Notices Disapproving Office/Director’s Request for 

Review 0 0 0

Truth-in-Lending Act Reimbursement Actions

Denials of Requests for Relief 0 1 0

Grants of Relief 0 0 0

Banks Making Reimbursement1 94 94 91

Suspicious Activity Reports (Open and closed institutions)1 128,973 133,153 137,548

Other Actions Not Listed2 12 5 7

1

 These actions do not constitute the initiation of a formal enforcement action and, therefore, are not included in the total number of actions 

initiated.

2

 Other Actions Not Listed includes two Section 19 Waiver grants and three Other Formal Actions.

3

 Correction for 2008
166 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

B. More About the FDIC

FDIC Board of Directors

Sheila C. Bair

Sheila C. Bair was sworn in as the 19th Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) on June 26, 2006. She was appointed Chairman for a fiveyear term, and as a member of the FDIC Board of Directors through July 2013.

Chairman Bair has an extensive background in banking and finance in a career

that has taken her from Capitol Hill, to academia, to the highest levels of government. Before joining the FDIC in 2006, she was the Dean’s Professor of Financial

Regulatory Policy for the Isenberg School of Management at the University of

Massachusetts-Amherst since 2002. While there, she also served on the FDIC’s

Advisory Committee on Banking Policy.

Other career experience includes serving as Assistant Secretary for Financial

Institutions at the U.S. Department of the Treasury (2001 to 2002), Senior Vice

President for Government Relations of the New York Stock Exchange (1995 to 2000), a Commissioner and Acting Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (1991 to 1995), and Research Director, Deputy

Counsel and Counsel to Senate Majority Leader Robert Dole (1981 to 1988).

As FDIC Chairman, Ms. Bair has presided over a tumultuous period in the nation’s financial sector. Her innovations have transformed the agency with programs that provide temporary liquidity guarantees, increases in

deposit insurance limits, and systematic loan modifications to troubled borrowers. Ms. Bair’s work at the FDIC

has also focused on consumer protection and economic inclusion. She has championed the creation of an Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion, seminal research on small-dollar loan programs, and the formation of

broad-based alliances in nine regional markets to bring underserved populations into the financial mainstream.

Since becoming FDIC Chairman, Ms. Bair has received a number of prestigious honors. Among them, in

2009 she was named one of Time Magazine’s “Time 100” most influential people; awarded the John F. Kennedy

Profile in Courage Award; and received the Hubert H. Humphrey Civil Rights Award. In 2008, Chairman Bair

topped The Wall Street Journal’s annual 50 “Women to Watch List.” That same year, Forbes Magazine named 

Ms. Bair as the second most powerful woman in the world after Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Chairman Bair has also received several honors for her published work on financial issues, including her

educational writings on money and finance for children, and for professional achievement. Among the honors

she has received are: Distinguished Achievement Award, Association of Education Publishers (2005); Personal

Service Feature of the Year, and Author of the Month Awards, Highlights Magazine for Children (2002, 2003

and 2004); and The Treasury Medal (2002). Her first children’s book, Rock, Brock and the Savings Shock, was

published in 2006 and her second, Isabel’s Car Wash, in 2008.

Chairman Bair received a bachelor’s degree from Kansas University and a J.D. from Kansas University

School of Law. She is married to Scott P. Cooper and has two children.
VI. Appendices 167

Martin J. Gruenberg

Martin J. Gruenberg was sworn in as Vice Chairman of the FDIC Board of

Directors on August 22, 2005. Upon the resignation of Chairman Donald Powell,

he served as Acting Chairman from November 15, 2005, to June 26, 2006. On

November 2, 2007, Mr. Gruenberg was named Chairman of the Executive Council

and President of the International Association of Deposit Insurers (IADI).

Mr. Gruenberg joined the FDIC Board after broad congressional experience in

the financialservices and regulatory areas. He served as Senior Counsel to Senator

Paul S. Sarbanes (D-MD) on the staff of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs from 1993 to 2005. Mr. Gruenberg advised the Senator

on issues of domestic and international financial regulation, monetary policy and

trade. He also served as Staff Director of the Banking Committee’s Subcommittee

on International Finance and Monetary Policy from 1987 to 1992. Major legislation in which Mr. Gruenbe

played an active role during his service on the Committee includes the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of

1991 (FDICIA), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Mr. Gruenberg holds a J.D. from Case Western Reserve Law School and an A.B. from Princeton University,

Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.

Thomas J. Curry

Thomas J. Curry took office on January 12, 2004, as a member of the Board of

Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for a six-year term. Mr.

Curry serves as Chairman of the FDIC’s Assessment Appeals Committee and

Case Review Committee.

Mr. Curry also serves as the Chairman of the NeighborWorks® America Board

of Directors. NeighborWorks® America is a national non-profit organization chartered by Congress to provide financial support, technical assistance, and training

for community-based neighborhood revitalization efforts.

Prior to joining the FDIC’s Board of Directors, Mr. Curry served five Massachusetts Governors as the Commonwealth’s Commissioner of Banks from 1990 to

1991 and from 1995 to 2003. He served as Acting Commissioner from February

1994 to June 1995. He previously served as First Deputy Commissioner and Assistant General Counsel within

the Massachusetts Division of Banks. He entered state government in 1982 as an attorney with the Massachusetts’ Secretary of State’s Office.

Director Curry served as the Chairman of the Conference of State Bank Supervisors from 2000 to 2001. He

served two terms on the State Liaison Committee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council,

including a term as Committee chairman.

He is a graduate of Manhattan College (summa cum laude), where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He

received his law degree from the New England School of Law.
168 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

John C. Dugan

John C. Dugan was sworn in as the 29th Comptroller of the Currency on August

4, 2005. In addition to serving as a director of the FDIC, Comptroller Dugan also

serves as chairman of the Joint Forum, a group of senior financial sector regulators from the United States, Canada, Europe, Japan, and Australia, and as a director of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council and NeighborWorks®

America.

Prior to his appointment as Comptroller, Mr. Dugan was a partner at the law

firm of Covington & Burling, where he chaired the firm’s Financial Institutions

Group. He specialized in banking and financial institution regulation. He also

served as outside counsel to the ABA Securities Association.

He served at the Department of Treasury from 1989 to 1993 and was appointed

assistant secretary for domestic finance in 1992. In 1991, he oversaw a comprehensive study of the banking

industry that formed the basis for the financial modernization legislation proposed by the administration of the

first President Bush. From 1985 to 1989, Mr. Dugan was minority counsel and minority general counsel for the

U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

Among his professional and volunteer activities before becoming Comptroller, he served as a director of

Minbanc, a charitable organization whose mission is to enhance professional and educational opportunities for

minorities in the banking industry. He was also a member of the American Bar Association’s committee on

banking law, the Federal Bar Association’s section of financial institutions and the economy, and the District

of Columbia Bar Association’s section of corporations, finance, and securities laws.

A graduate of the University of Michigan in 1977 with an A.B. in English literature, Mr. Dugan also earned

his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1981.

John E. Bowman

John E. Bowman became Acting Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision

(OTS) in March 2009. Mr. Bowman joined the OTS in June of 1999 as Deputy

Chief Counsel for Business Transactions. In May 2004, he was appointed Chief

Counsel and in April 2007, he was appointed Deputy Director and Chief Counsel.

Before joining the OTS, Mr. Bowman was a partner with the law firm of Brown &

Wood LLP in its Washington, DC, office, where he specialized in government and

corporate finance, securities and financial services regulation.

Before entering private practice, Mr. Bowman served for many years as Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. While at Treasury, he provided counsel to the Treasury Under Secretary

for Domestic Finance, the Assistant Secretaries for Financial Institutions Policy,

Financial Markets and Economic Policy, and the Fiscal Assistant Secretary on a broad range of issues from

financial services legislation to the financing of the federal debt.

During his government career, Mr. Bowman has been the recipient of numerous awards and honors, including the Presidential Rank Award and the Secretary of the Treasury’s Distinguished Service Award.
VI. Appendices 169

Office of the

Chairman

Sheila C. Bair

Chairman

Vice Chairman

Martin J. Gruenberg

Deputy to the  Chairman

for Resolution and Legal Policy

Michael H. Krimminger

Deputy to the Chairman

Jason C. Cave

Deputy to the Chairman and

Chief Financial Officer

Steven O. App

Board of Directors

Sheila C. Bair

Martin J. Gruenberg

Thomas J. Curry

John C. Dugan

John E. Bowman

Chief Information Officer/

Chief Privacy Officer

Michael E. Bartell

Office of Inspector General

Jon T. Rymer

Inspector General

Chief of Staff

Jesse O. Villareal, Jr.

Office of Public Affairs

Andrew S. Gray

Director

Division of

Supervision and

Consumer Protection

Sandra L. Thompson

Director

Division of Insurance

and Research

Arthur J. Murton

Director

Division of Resolutions

and Receiverships

Mitchell L. Glassman

Director

Office of

International Affairs

Fred S. Carns

Director

General Counsel

Michael Bradeld

Deputy to the Chairman

for External Affairs

Paul M. Nash

Office of

Legislative Affairs

Vacant

Director

Office of the

Ombudsman

Cottrell L. Webster

Ombudsman

Office of Diversity and

Economic Opportunity

D. Michael Collins

Director

Legal Division

Michael Bradeld

General Counsel

Corporate

University

Thom H. Terwilliger

Chief Learning Ocer

Office of Enterprise

Risk Management

James H. Angel, Jr.

Director

Division of

Administration

Arleas Upton Kea

Director

Division of Information

Technology

Michael E. Bartell

Director

Division of Finance

Bret D. Edwards

Director

FDIC Organization Chart/Officials

As of December 31, 200
170 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Note: In 2008, the Corporation adopted the Full-Time Equivalent methodology reflective of an employee’s scheduled work hours. 

Prior to 2008, staffing totals reflect total employees on board.

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

Staffing Trends 2000–2009

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

6,452 6,167 5,430 5,311 5,078 4,514 4,476 4,532 4,988 6,557

FDIC Year-End Staffing

Corporate Staffing
VI. Appendices 171

Number of Employees by Division/Office 2008–2009 (Year-End)1

Total Washington Regional/Field

2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008

Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection 3,168 2,733 222 207 2,946 2,526

Division of Resolutions and Receiverships 1,158 391 78 60 1,080 331

Legal Division 625 472 302 275 323 197

Division of Administration 373 316 217 209 156 107

Corporate University 350 240 52 47 298 193

Division of Information Technology 298 283 227 221 71 62

Division of Insurance and Research 193 182 150 145 43 36

Division of Finance 155 159 145 148 10 11

Office of Inspector General 120 111 84 81 36 30

Executive Offices2 53 48 53 48 0 0

Office of Diversity and Economic Opportunity 29 31 29 31 0 0

Office of the Ombudsman 22 11 11 8 11 3

Office of Enterprise Risk Management 13 12 13 12 0 0

Total 6,557 4,988 1,584 1,493 4,973 3,496

1

 The FDIC reports staffing totals using a Full-Time Equivalent methodology, which is based on an employee’s scheduled work hours. Totals may not foot due to rounding.

2

 Includes the Offices of the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Director (Appointive), Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Information Officer, Legislative Affairs, Public Affairs, 

International Affairs, and External Affairs.
172 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Sources of Information

FDIC Web Site

www.fdic.gov

A wide range of banking, consumer and financial information is available on the FDIC’s web site.

This includes the FDIC’s Electronic Deposit Insurance Estimator (EDIE), which estimates an individual’s deposit insurance coverage; the Institution Directory—financial profiles of FDIC-insured

institutions; Community Reinvestment Act evaluations and ratings for institutions supervised by the

FDIC; Call Reports—banks’ reports of condition and income; and Money Smart, a training program to

help individuals outside the financial mainstream enhance their money management skills and create

positive banking relationships. Readers also can access a variety of consumer pamphlets, FDIC press

releases, speeches, and other updates on the agency’s activities, as well as corporate databases and

customized reports of FDIC and banking industry information.

FDIC Call Center

Phone: 877-275-3342 (877-ASK-FDIC)

703-562-2222

Hearing Impaired: 800-925-4618 (Toll Free), 

703-562-2289 (Local)

The FDIC Call Center in Washington, DC, is the primary telephone point of contact for general questions from the banking community, the public, and FDIC employees. The Call Center directly, or in

concert with other FDIC subject-matter experts, responds to questions about deposit insurance and

other consumer issues and concerns, as well as questions about FDIC programs and activities. The

Call Center also makes referrals to other federal and state agencies as needed. Hours of operation are

8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday–Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday–Sunday.

Recorded information about deposit insurance and other topics is available 24 hours a day at the same

telephone number.

As a customer service, the FDIC Call Center has many bilingual Spanish agents on staff and has

access to a translation service able to assist with over 40 different languages.
VI. Appendices 173

Public Information Center

3501 Fairfax Drive

Room E-1021

Arlington, VA 22226

Phone: 877-275-3342 (877-ASK-FDIC), 

or 703-562-2200

Fax: 703-562-2296

E-mail: publicinfo@fdic.gov

FDIC publications, press releases, speeches and congressional testimony, directives to financial institutions, policy manuals, and other documents are available on request or by subscription through the

Public Information Center. These documents include the Quarterly Banking Profile, FDIC Consumer 

News, and a variety of deposit insurance and consumer pamphlets.

Office of the Ombudsman

3501 Fairfax Drive

Room E-2022

Arlington, VA 22226

Phone: 877-275-3342 (877-ASK-FDIC)

Fax: 703-562-6057

E-mail: ombudsman@fdic.gov

The Office of the Ombudsman (OO) is an independent, neutral, and confidential resource and liaison

for the banking industry and the general public. The OO responds to inquiries about the FDIC in a fair,

impartial, and timely manner. It researches questions and complaints primarily from bankers. The OO

also recommends ways to improve FDIC operations, regulations, and customer service.
174 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

Regional and Area Offices

Atlanta Regional Office

10 Tenth Street, NE

Suite 800

Atlanta, Georgia 303

(678) 916-2200

Alabama

Florida

Georgia

North Carolina

South Carolina

Virginia

West Virginia

Dallas Regional Office

1601 Bryan Street

Dallas, Texas 75201

(214) 754-0098

Colorado

New Mexico

Oklahoma

Texas

Memphis Area Office

5100 Poplar Avenue

Suite 1900

Memphis, Tennessee 38137

(901) 685-1603

Arkansas

Louisiana

Mississippi

Tennessee

Kansas City Regional Office

2345 Grand Boulevard

Suite 1200

Kansas City, Missouri 64108

(816) 234-8000

Iowa

Kansas

Minnesota

Missouri

Nebraska

North Dakota

South Dakota

Chicago Regional Office

300 South Riverdale Plaza

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(312) 382-6000

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Michigan

Ohio

Wisconsin
VI. Appendices 175

San Francisco Regional Office

25 Ecker Street

Suite 2300

San Francisco, California 94105

(415) 546-0160

Alaska

Arizona

California

Guam

Hawaii

Idaho

Montana

Nevada

Oregon

Utah

Washington

Wyoming

New York Regional Office

350 Fifth Avenue

Suite 1200

New York, New York 10118

(917) 320-2500

Delaware

District of Columbia

Maryland

New Jersey

New York

Pennsylvania

Puerto Rico

Virgin Islands

Boston Area Office

15 Braintree Hill Office Park

Suite 100

Braintree, Massachusetts 02184

(781) 794-5500

Connecticut

Maine

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

Rhode Island

Vermont
176 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

C. Office of Inspector General’s 

Assessment of the Management 

and Performance Challenges 

Facing the FDIC

2009 Management and Performance 

Challenges

Under the Reports Consolidation Act, the

OIG is required to identify the most significant

management and performance challenges facing

the Corporation and provide its assessment to

the Corporation for inclusion in its annual performance and accountability report. The OIG

conducts this assessment yearly and identifies

a number of specific areas of challenge facing

the Corporation at the time. In identifying the

challenges, we consider the Corporation’s overall program and operational responsibilities;

financial industry, economic, and technological

conditions and trends; areas of congressional

interest and concern; relevant laws and regulations; the Chairman’s priorities and corresponding corporate goals; and the ongoing activities to

address the issues involved. Taking time annually to reexamine the corporate mission and priorities as the OIG identifies the challenges helps in

planning our work and directing OIG resources

to key areas of risk.

Unprecedented events and turmoil in the economy and financial services industry over the past

year and a half have impacted every facet of the

FDIC’s mission and operations and continue to

pose challenges. In looking at the recent past and

the current environment and anticipating to the

extent possible what the future holds, the Office

of Inspector General (OIG) believes the FDIC

faces challenges in the areas listed below. While

the Corporation’s most pressing priority has been

its continuing efforts to restore and maintain

public confidence and stability, challenges have

persisted in other areas as well. We would note

in particular that the Corporation is devoting

significant attention to carrying out its massive

resolution and receivership workload, brought on

by 140 financial institution failures over the past

year, in contrast to 25 failures during 2008 and

3 in 2007. Further, the Chairman has indicated

that the FDIC anticipates failures during 2010 to

exceed the level in 2009. At the same time, as

we pointed out last year, the FDIC faces challenges in maintaining the viability of the Deposit

Insurance Fund (DIF), enhancing its supervision

of financial institutions, protecting consumers,

and managing its growing internal and contractor workforce and other corporate resources. The

Corporation will continue to face daunting challenges as it carries out its longstanding mission,

responds to emerging issues, and plays a key part

in shaping the future of bank regulation.

Restoring and Maintaining Public Confidence 

and Stability in the Financial System

Importantly, and integral to maintaining confidence and stability in the financial system, notwithstanding the 140 failures of 2009, the FDIC

stood behind its deposit insurance commitment,

and no depositor lost a single penny of insured

deposits. Additionally, over the past year, the

FDIC played a key role, along with other regulators, the Congress, the Department of the Treas

ury, financial institutions, and other stakeholders

in a number of temporary financial stability programs that were formed to address crisis conditions. These included the Temporary Liquidity

Guarantee Program, Troubled Asset Relief Program, and loan modification programs, to name a
VI. Appendices 177

to address the fundamental causes of the recent

crisis. These entities make up a significant share

of the banking industry’s assets. Although the

FDIC is not the primary federal regulator for

these institutions, it holds significant responsibility as deposit insurer for all. The FDIC has

expanded its own presence at such institutions

through additional and enhanced on-site and

off-site monitoring and oversight. As of the end

of December 2009, its Large Insured Depository Institution program covered 109 institutions

with total assets of more than $10 trillion. Early

identification and remediation of issues that pose

risks to the overall financial system will continue to be a challenging task.

In a related vein, the FDIC has also endorsed

a resolution mechanism that can effectively

address failed financial firms regardless of their

size and complexity and assure that shareholders

and creditors absorb losses without cost to the

taxpayers. Such a mechanism would maintain

financial market stability and minimize systemic

consequences for the national and international

economy. The Corporation may face challenges

as it advocates for changes to the supervision

and resolution of systemically important financial firms.

As the debate continues over these and other

aspects of regulatory reform in the months

ahead, the FDIC’s continuous coordination and

cooperation with the other federal regulators and

parties throughout the banking and financial services industries will be critical. The FDIC, along

with other regulators, will continue to be subject

to increased scrutiny and possible corresponding

regulatory reform proposals that may have a substantial impact on the regulatory entities and the

programs and activities they currently operate.

few. Some of these have wound down, others are

ongoing. The fulfillment of the FDIC’s insurance

commitment and the successful implementation

of programs designed to ensure the flow of credit,

strengthen the financial system, and provide aid

to homeowners and small businesses have gone

a long way in helping to restore confidence and

stability in the financial system. Going forward,

the Corporation will need to continue to remain

poised to address new challenges. For example,

emerging problems in the commercial real estate

(CRE) sector will likely require attention. While

residential real estate markets suffered first during the recent crisis, problems on the commercial

side came about later. Sales of commercial real

estate slowed dramatically in 2008 and 2009, as

vacancy rates and rental rates declined significantly. CRE price declines have also been larger

on average than declines in home values, with

CRE price indices down by over 40 percent from

their fall 2007 high point. The sharp decline is

attributable in part to higher required rates of

return on the part of investors and deterioration

in the availability of credit for commercial real

estate financing. Banks will likely increasingly

feel the repercussions of stress in the CRE sector

in the months ahead, and the FDIC will need to

closely monitor the impact of such problems on

the institutions it regulates and insures.

Over the past year, the FDIC has also been a

proponent of certain changes to the financial regulatory system to further stabilize and shore up

confidence in the financial services industry. In

that connection, the FDIC Chairman believes we

need to move away from the concept of “too big

to fail” and create a system of macro-prudential

supervision for systemically important financial firms and other large/complex institutions
178 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

ing 187 active receiverships, with assets totaling

about $41 billion.

Ofspecial note, the FDIC isretaining large volumes of assets as part of purchase and assumption

agreements with institutions that are assuming

the insured deposits of failed institutions. A number of the purchase and assumption agreements

include shared-loss arrangements with other parties that involve pools of assets worth billions of

dollars and that can extend up to 10 years. From

a dollar standpoint, the FDIC’s exposure is staggering: as of December 31, 2009, the Corporation

was party to 93 shared loss agreements related to

closed institutions, with initial covered assets of

$126.4 billion. Because the assuming institutions

are servicing the assets and the FDIC is reimbursing a substantial portion of the related losses and

expenses, there is significant risk to the Corporation. Additionally, the FDIC is increasingly using

structured sales transactions to sell assets to third

parties that are not required to be regulated financial institutions. Such arrangements need to be

closely monitored to ensure compliance with all

terms and conditions of the agreements at a time

when the FDIC’s control environment is continuing to evolve.

It takes a substantial level of human resources

to handle the mounting resolution and receivership workload, and effectively administering such

a complex workforce will be challenging. DRR

staffing grew from approximately 400 employees

at the start of 2009 to the year-end staffing level

of 1,158 full-time equivalents. The FDIC Board of

Directors approved a further increase in the Division’sstaffing to 2,310 for 2010. Most of these new

employees have been hired on non-permanent

appointments with terms of up to 5 years. Additionally, over $1.8 billion will be available for

Resolving Failed Institutions and 

Managing Receiverships

A fundamental part of the FDIC mission

and perhaps the Corporation’s most significant

current challenge is efficiently handling the

resolutions of failing FDIC-insured institutions

and providing prompt, responsive, and effective administration of failing and failed financial institutions in its receivership capacity. The

resolution process involves the complex process

of valuing a failing federally insured depository

institution, marketing it, soliciting and accepting

bids for the sale of the institution, considering

the least costly resolution method, determining which bid to accept, and working with the

acquiring institution through the closing process. The receivership process, also demanding,

involves performing the closing function at the

failed bank; liquidating any remaining assets;

and distributing any proceeds to the FDIC, the

bank customers, general creditors, and those

with approved claims.

The Corporation is now facing a resolution

and receivership workload of huge proportion.

One hundred forty institutions failed during

2009, with total assets at failure of $171.2 billion and total estimated losses to the Deposit

Insurance Fund of approximately $35.6 billion.

During 2009, the number of institutions on the

FDIC’s “Problem List” also rose to its highest level in 16 years. As of December 31, 2009,

there were 702 insured institutions on the “Problem List,” indicating a probability of more failures to come and an increased asset disposition

workload. Total assets of problem institutions

increased to $402.8 billion as of year-end 2009.

As of the end of December 2009, the Division

of Resolutions and Receiverships was manag-
VI. Appendices 179

ly manner those receiverships not subject to lossshare agreements, structured sales, or other legal

impediments.

Ensuring the Viability of the Deposit 

Insurance Fund (DIF)

A critical priority for the FDIC is to ensure that

the DIF remains viable to protect insured depositors in the event of an institution’s failure. The

basic maximum insurance amount under current

law is $250,000 through year-end 2013. Estimated

insured deposits based on the current limit rose to

$5.4 trillion as of December 31, 2009.

The DIF has suffered from the failures of the

past.Estimated lossesfromfailuresin 2008 totaled

$19.8 billion and from failures in 2009 totaled

$35.6 billion. To maintain sufficient DIF balances, the FDIC collects risk-based insurance premiums from insured institutions and invests deposit

insurance funds. In September 2009, the FDIC’s

DIF balance—or the net worth of the fund—fell

below zero for the first time since the third quarter

of 1992. The fund balance of negative $20.9 billion as of December 31, 2009, reflects a $44 billion contingent loss reserve that has been set aside

to cover estimated losses over the next year. Just

as banks reserve for loan losses, the FDIC has to

set aside reserves for anticipated closings over the

next year. Combining the fund balance with this

contingent loss reserve showed total DIF reserves

with a positive balance of $23.1 billion.

The FDIC Board of Directors closely monitors the viability of the DIF. In February 2009,

the FDIC Board took action to ensure the continued strength of the fund by imposing a one-time

emergency special assessment on institutions as

of June 30, 2009. On two occasions, the Board

also set assessment rates that generally increase

contracting for receivership-related services during 2010, and by the end of 2009, DRR already

employed over 1,500 contractor personnel. The

significant surge in failed-bank assets and associated contracting activities will require effective

and efficient contractor oversight management

and technical monitoring functions. Bringing on

so many contractors and new employees in a short

period of time can strain personnel and administrative resources in such areas as employee background checks, which, if not timely and properly

executed can compromise the integrity of FDIC

programs and operations.

As the Corporation’s workforce responds to

institution failures and carries out its resolution

and receivership responsibilities, it will face

a number of challenges. It needs to ensure that

related processes, negotiations, and decisions

regarding the future status of the failed or failing institutions are marked by fairness, transparency, and integrity. It will be challenged in

timely marketing failing institutions to qualified

and interested potential bidders, selling assets,

and maximizing potential values of failed bank

franchises. Over time, these tasks may be even

more difficult, given concentrations of assets

in the same geographic area, a decreasing pool

of interested buyers, and an inventory of less

attractive or hard-to-sell assets. It is also possible

that individuals or entities that may have been

involved in previous institution failures could try

to reenter the FDIC’s asset purchase and management arena. Appropriate safeguards must be

in place to ensure the Corporation knows the

backgrounds of its bidders and acquirers to prevent those parties from profiting at the expense

of the Corporation. Finally, in order to minimize

costs, it will be important to terminate in a time-
180 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

the amount that institutions pay each quarter

for insurance and also made adjustments that

expand the range of assessment rates. The Corporation had adopted a restoration plan in October 2008 to increase the reserve ratio to the 1.15

percent designated threshold within five years.

In February 2009, the Board voted to extend the

restoration plan horizon to seven years and in

September 2009 extended the time frame to eight

years. As of December 31, 2009, the reserve ratio

was negative 0.39 percent.

To further bolster the DIF’s cash position,

the FDIC Board approved a measure on November 12, 2009, to require insured institutions to

prepay 13 quarters’ worth of deposit insurance

premiums—about $45.7 billion—at the end of

2009. The intent of this measure was to provide

the FDIC with the funds needed to carry on with

the task of resolving failed institutions in 2010,

but without accelerating the impact of assessments on the industry’s earnings and capital. The

Corporation will face challenges going forward

in its ongoing efforts to replenish the DIF and

implement a deposit insurance premium system

that differentiates based on risk to the fund.

The Corporation will also be continuing to

play a leadership role in its work with global partners on such matters as Basel II to ensure strong

regulatory capitalstandardsto protect the international financial system from problems that might

arise when a major bank or series of banks fail.

Ensuring Institution Safety and Soundness 

Through an Effective Examination and 

Supervision Program

The Corporation’s bank supervision program

promotes the safety and soundness of FDIC-supervised insured depository institutions. As of

December 31, 2009, the FDIC was the primary

federal regulator for about 5,000 FDIC-insured,

state-chartered institutions that were not members of the Federal Reserve System (generally

referred to as “state non-member” institutions).

The examination of the banks that it regulates is

a core FDIC supervisory function. The Corporation also has back-up examination authority to

protect the interests of the deposit insurance fund

for about 3,000 national banks, state-chartered

banks that are members of the Federal Reserve

System, and savings associations.

In the current environment, efforts to continue to ensure safety and soundness and carry out

the examination function will be challenging in

a number of ways. Of particular importance for

2010 is that the Corporation needs to continue

to assess the implications of the recent financial

and economic crisis and integrate lessonslearned

and any needed changes to the examination program into the supervisory process. At the same

time, it needs to continue to carry out scheduled

examinations to ensure the safety and soundness

of the thousands of institutions that it regulates.

The Corporation has developed a comprehensive

“forward-looking supervision” training program

for its examiners designed to build on lessons

learned over the past year or so and will need to

put that training into practice going forward.

Asin the past, the Corporation needsto ensure

it has sufficient resources to keep pace with its

rigorous examination schedule and the needed

expertise to address complex transactions and

new financial instruments that may affect an

institution’s safety and soundness. In light of the

many changes in financial institution operations

over the past year or so, the FDIC’s examination

workforce may need to review and comment
VI. Appendices 181

be effective to ensure institutions are promptly

complying with any supervisory enforcement

actions—informal or formal—resulting from the

FDIC’s risk-management examination process.

In some cases, to maintain the integrity of the

banking system, the Corporation will also need

to aggressively pursue prompt actions against

bank boards or senior officers who may have

contributed to an institution’s failure.

The rapid changes in the banking industry, increase in electronic and on-line banking,

growing sophistication of fraud schemes, and the

mere complexity of financial transactions and

financial instruments all create potential risks

at FDIC-insured institutions and their service

providers. These risks could negatively impact

the FDIC and the integrity of the U.S. financial system and contribute to institution failures if existing checks and balances falter or are

intentionally bypassed. The FDIC must seek to

minimize the extent to which the institutions it

supervises are involved in or victims of financial

crimes and other abuse. It needs to continue to

focus on Bank Secrecy Act examinations to prevent banks and other financial service providers

from being used as intermediaries for, or to hide

the transfer or deposit of money derived from,

criminal activity. FDIC examiners need to be

alert to the possibility of other fraudulent activity in financial institutions, and make full use of

reports, information, and other resources available to them to help detect such fraud.

Protecting and Educating Consumers and 

Ensuring an Effective Compliance Program

The FDIC’s efforts to ensure that banks serve

their communities and treat consumers fairly

continue to be a priority. The FDIC carries out its

on a number of new issues when they assign

examination ratings. With respect to risk management examinations, senior DSC management

and examiners will need to continue to adopt the

“forward-looking” supervisory approach, carefully assess the institution’s overall risks, and

base ratings not on current financial condition

alone, but rather on consideration of possible

future risks. These risks should be identified by

rigorous and effective on-site and off-site review

mechanisms and accurate metrics that identify

risks embedded in the balance sheets and operations of the insured depository institutions so

that steps can be taken to mitigate their impact

on the institutions.

The Corporation’s supervision workload is

further compounded by the increased number

of problem institutions that exist, as referenced

earlier—that is, institutions assigned a composite rating of 4 or 5 under the Uniform Financial

Institutions Rating System by its primary federal

regulator or by the FDIC if it disagrees with the

primary federal regulator’s rating. Problem institutions are subject to close supervision with more

frequent examinations, visitations, and off-site

reviews. They are also subject to enforcement

actions requiring corrective actions designed

to resolve the bank’s deteriorating condition. In

light of recent failures, such scrutiny is of paramount importance.

In all cases, examiners need to continue to

bring any identified problemsto the bank’s Board

and management’s attention, assign appropriate

ratings, and make actionable recommendations

to address areas of concern. In doing so they

will continue to need the full support of senior

FDIC management. Subsequently, the FDIC’s

corrective action and follow-up processes must
182 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

personal savings, responsible financial management, and the benefits and limitations of deposit

insurance. It will continue educational and outreach endeavors to disseminate updated information to all consumers, including the unbanked

and underbanked, going forward so that taxpayers have the needed knowledge for responsible

financial management and informed decisionmaking.

With respect to consumer protections in the

context of possible regulatory reform, the FDIC

supports the establishment of a single primary

federal consumer-products regulator. In the

FDIC’s view, such an entity should regulate providers of consumer credit, savings, payment, and

other financial products and services. It should

have sole rulemaking authority for consumer

financial protection statutes and should have

supervisory and enforcement authority over all

non-bank providers of consumer credit and backup supervisory authority over insured depository institutions. As with other regulatory reform

initiatives, the FDIC may face challenges as it

seeks to make this concept a reality in the coming months.

Effectively Managing the FDIC Workforce 

and Other Corporate Resources

The FDIC’s human, financial, IT, and physical resources have been stretched over the past

year and the Corporation will continue to face

challenges during 2010 in promoting sound governance and effective stewardship ofits core business processes and resources. Of particular note,

FDIC staffing levels are increasing dramatically.

The Board approved a 2010 FDIC staffing level

of 8,653, reflecting an increase from 7,010 positions in 2009. These staff—mostly temporary,

consumer protection role by educating consumers, providing them with access to information

about theirrights and disclosuresthat are required

by federal laws and regulations, and examining the banks where the FDIC is the primary

federal regulator to determine the institutions’

compliance with laws and regulations governing consumer protection, unfair or deceptive

acts and practices, fair lending, and community

investment. The FDIC’s compliance program,

including examinations, visitations, and followup supervisory attention on violations and other

program deficiencies, is critical to ensuring that

consumers and businesses obtain the benefits

and protections afforded them by law. Proactively identifying and assessing potential risks associated with new and existing consumer products

will continue to challenge the FDIC.

The FDIC will continue to conduct Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) examinations in

accordance with the CRA, a 1977 law intended

to encourage insured banks and thrifts to help

meet the credit needs of the communities in

which they are chartered to do business, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods,

consistent with safe and sound operations. The

Corporation needs to maximize the benefits of

the interactions between its compliance and risk

management functions in the interest of maintaining healthy, viable institutions that serve

their communities well.

The FDIC will continue to address its mounting workload of responding to public inquiries

from consumers regarding deposit insurance

coverage and other concerns stemming from the

financial distress they have experienced. Also,

the Corporation will continue to emphasize

financial literacy to promote the importance of
VI. Appendices 183

poration’sfinancial management efforts must continuously seek to be efficient and cost-conscious.

Amidst the turmoil in the industry and economy, the FDIC is engaging in massive amounts

of information sharing—both internally and

with external partners. Its information technology resources need to ensure the integrity, availability, and appropriate confidentiality of bank

data, personally identifiable information, and

other sensitive information in an environment

of increasingly sophisticated security threats

and global connectivity. Continued attention

to ensuring the physical security of all FDIC

resources is also critical.

The FDIC’s numerous enterprise risk management activities need to consistently identify,

analyze, and mitigate operational risks on an

integrated, corporate-wide basis. Such risks need

to be communicated throughout the Corporation

and the relationship between internal and external risks and related risk mitigation activities

should be understood by all involved. To further

enhance risk monitoring efforts, the Corporation

has established six new Program Management

Offices to address risks associated with such

activities as shared loss agreements, contracting

oversight for new programs and resolution activities, the systemic resolution authority program,

and human resource management concerns.

These new offices and the contractors engaged

to assist them will require additional oversight

mechanisms to help ensure their success.

**********

The FDIC OIG is committed to its mission of

assisting and augmenting the FDIC’s contribution

to stability and public confidence in the nation’s

financial system. Now more than ever, we have a

and including a number of rehired annuitan

—will perform bank examinations and other

supervisory activities to address bank failures,

and, as mentioned previously, an increasing

number will be devoted to managing and selling

assets retained by the FDIC when a failed bank is

sold. The FDIC has opened two new temporary

Satellite Offices (East Coast and West Coast)

and will open a third in the Midwest for resolving failed financial institutions and managing the

resulting receiverships. As referenced earlier, the

Corporation’s contracting level has also grown

significantly, especially with respect to resolution and receivership work.

Opening new offices, rapidly hiring and

training many new staff, expanding contracting activity, and training those with contract

oversight responsibilities are all placing heavy

demands on the Corporation’s personnel and

administrative staff and operations. When conditions improve throughout the industry and the

economy, a number of employees will need to

be released and staffing levels will return to a

pre-crisis level, which may cause additional disruption to ongoing operations and the working

environment. Among other challenges, pre- and

post-employment checks for new employees and

contractors will need to ensure the highest standards of ethical conduct, and for all employees,

the Corporation will seek to sustain its emphasis

on fostering employee engagement and morale.

To support these increases in FDIC and contractor resources, the Board approved a nearly

$4.0 billion 2010 Corporate Operating Budget,

approximately $1.4 billion higher than for 2009.

The FDIC’s operating expenses are largely paid

from the insurance fund, and consistent with

sound corporate governance principles, the Cor-
184 FDIC 2009 Annual Report

crucial role to play to help ensure economy, efficiency, effectiveness, integrity, and transparency

of programs and associated activities, and to

protect against fraud, waste, and abuse that can

undermine the FDIC’s success. Our management

and performance challenges evaluation is based

primarily on the FDIC’s operating environment

and available information as of the end of 2009,

unless otherwise noted. We will continue to

communicate and coordinate closely with the

Corporation, the Congress, and other financial

regulatory OIGs as we address these issues and

challenges. Results of OIG work will be posted

at www.fdicig.gov.