Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Impacts of Changes in the
Home Mortgage Market
on Hispanic Homeowners in
Pennsylvania and Delaware
A study by The Reinvestment Fund for the
Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh and
the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency
July 2009
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Foreword
As it is for most Americans, the home is often the primary asset for Latino households,
representing more than three-quarters of their net worth. In fact, homeownership has been
promoted as a public policy objective because home equity has become a crucial strategy to
save for retirement, sending children to college, starting a small business, or providing a safety
net for financial emergencies. However, Latino and immigrant homebuyers have faced a
number of unique underwriting challenges that the mortgage market is ill-equipped to process
effectively. For example, 22% of Latinos have a “thin” credit file, or no credit history, which
usually results in a “0” credit score, compared to only 4% of Whites.1 Moreover,
approximately 35% of Latino families do not have basic checking or savings accounts.2
Multiple wage earners, additional co-borrowers, and cash income are also common among
Latino borrowers.
While mortgage products existed during the boom years that used nontraditional credit to
establish an acceptable credit history and allow for other common Latino characteristics, they
generally require manual underwriting, which is time-and resource-intensive for a lender. In
addition, compensation systems tend to make manually underwritten loans less attractive to
loan officers. Instead of taking the time necessary to properly underwrite hard-to-serve
borrowers, lenders channeled them to their subprime affiliates or simply did not market to
such borrowers. In this way, credit that would have otherwise been available via such flexible
products was effectively limited because of increased profit and opportunity costs. These
structural factors effectively barred many Latino families from obtaining prime mortgage
financing.
Meanwhile, subprime products and loan characteristics earned higher fees for loan originators.
Originators with a wide range of products at their disposal often steered borrowers, especially
those considered “hard-to-serve,” toward products that earned higher commissions rather
than products that were a good fit for the consumer. The subprime market does not refer its
“hard-to-serve” clients to another market. Rather, lenders in the subprime market relied on
risk-based pricing models to price loans for any risk level. The criteria for gauging risk were
discretionary, vary by lender, and are centered on making profits rather than the
appropriateness of the loan to the consumer’s financial situation.
Given the situation of Hispanic borrowers and the structure of the market, it is no surprise
that Hispanics were routinely steered toward expensive and risky loans. Latinos are 30% more
likely than Whites to receive a high-cost loan when purchasing their home.3 Other research
shows Latinos were more likely to receive loans with interest-only or negative amortization
1
Stegman, Michael, et al., "Automated Underwriting: Getting to ‘Yes’ for More Low-Income Applicants,"
Presented before the 2001 Conference on Housing Opportunity, Research Institute for Housing America
Center for Community Capitalism, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, April 2001.
2
Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation, 2002 National Survey of Latinos. Washington, DC: 2002.
3 Bocian, Debbie Gruenstein, Keith S. Ernst and Wei Li, Unfair Lending: The Effect of Race and Ethnicity on Price of
Subprime Mortgages. Center for Responsible Lending, May 2006.
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
features, prepayment penalties, and high Yield Spread Premiums. In fact, Latinos were more
than twice as likely as Whites to receive an Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM). Since
these loans are often considered prime or “Alt-A” products, this trend does not show up in
HMDA data.
TRF’s report for the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh and the Pennsylvania Housing
Finance Agency begins to shed light on the experience of Latino families. The process of
steering families into loans more expensive than demanded by their credit has been well
documented. However, the impact of that steering has not. Little information exists on the
number of foreclosures among Latino households, though we know that products marketed
heavily in Latino communities carry a higher risk of foreclosure. While there are challenges
with the data, this report documents a number of important trends that lay the foundation for
future research and policy-making, including:
• Latinos and African Americans were more likely than Whites to receive high-cost
mortgages, as defined by the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. The trends highlighted
in this report also demonstrate a growing presence of potentially risky loan features
such as balloon payments.
• Latino households were more heavily represented in the purchase-money market than
the refinance market, and also more likely to run into foreclosure trouble with their
purchase loan.
• Latino homeowners are experiencing foreclosure at rates significantly above their
White counterparts.
• Services to struggling Latino homeowners may be thinner than expected. Despite
reporting the ability to serve Spanish-speaking preferred clients, relatively few housing
counseling organizations could do so.
These findings are timely, having implications for policy discussions being debated in
Congress and before bank regulators. They also serve as a call for further research.
Expanding our understanding of all market segments, we can target our public policy
responses more accurately. We congratulate you on this report.
Janis Bowdler
Associate Director, Wealth-Building
Policy Project
National Council of La Raza
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Table of Contents
I. Background and Introduction 1
II. Demographics 2
III. Mortgage Originations 7
IV. Homeowners’ Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program 13
V. Characteristics of Homeowners in Foreclosure 23
VI. Distance to Counseling Agencies 27
VII. Geographic Distribution of Mortgage Delinquency 28
VIII. Housing Counseling Agency Survey 35
IX. Conclusion 40
Appendix 1: American Housing Survey
Appendix 2: 2007 HMDA Lender Market Shares
Appendix 3: PHFA Approved HEMAP Counseling Agencies
Appendix 4: Geographic Distribution of Foreclosures
Acknowledgements
This work was done by The Reinvestment Fund under contract with the Federal Home Loan Bank of
Pittsburgh and the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. We gratefully acknowledge both agencies
for their insights and information in support of this work. In particular, we acknowledge:
Federal Home Loan Bank: John Bendel (Director, Community Investment); Rev. Luis A. Cortés, Jr.
(Board of Directors, FHLB & President, Esperanza); Dave Buches (Manager, Community Investment)
Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency: Brian A. Hudson, Sr. (President and CEO); Daryl D. Rotz
(Director, Homeowners’ Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program)
We also wish to thank Ms. Janis Bowdler (Associate Director, Wealth-Building Policy Project) at
The National Council of La Raza for truly valuable review and comment on study design and
interpretation of results.
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
I. Background and Introduction
Under contract to the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (FHLB) and the Pennsylvania
Housing Finance Agency (PHFA), The Reinvestment Fund (TRF) was tasked with exploring
how recent changes in the real estate and mortgage markets have impacted households headed
by Hispanics and communities with significant Hispanic populations. Recognizing full well
that recent upheavals in those markets have spared few owners (or renters for that matter), the
fundamental question we explore in this work is: Have Hispanic owners fared the same, better, or
worse than homeowners who are not Hispanic in the FHLB/PHFA region? In particular, FHLB and
PHFA were interested in five counties in Pennsylvania (Berks, Lancaster, Lehigh,
Northampton and Philadelphia) and one in Delaware (New Castle). These areas were selected
by the FHLB and PHFA because they include cities with large and growing Hispanic
populations. The study counties in Pennsylvania include 306,397 persons of Hispanic origin
(57.9% of the Commonwealth’s total Hispanic population); the Delaware study county
includes 36,282 persons of Hispanic origin (67.9% of the state’s total Hispanic population).
The data used for this study come from many sources. Our most critical databases include:
• Census and American Community Survey (ACS) data provide basic demographic
information at the local, county, state and national levels.
• The American Housing Survey (AHS) gives national data on the experience of
Hispanic homeowners.
• Mortgage application information comes from the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
(HMDA) databases.
• Foreclosure filings come typically from the official office in each county responsible
for receiving the filing of a foreclosure action; where those official records were not
available, data were obtained from a private data vendor (RealtyTrac, Inc.).
• Sale and mortgage transaction histories for properties in a state of foreclosure were
obtained from a private data vendor – First American CoreLogic’s RealQuest
database.
• PHFA’s Homeowners’ Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program (HEMAP) provides
data on Pennsylvania residents in a delinquent mortgage status.
• Mortgage delinquency figures, summarized for zip codes, come from a private data
vendor, McDash Analytics, LLC.
• Telephone surveys of representatives of housing counseling agencies in the study
counties; conducted by TRF staff.
All of these data taken together allow us to develop a picture of Hispanic borrowers and
homeowners, and especially those homeowners facing mortgage foreclosure.
1
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
II. Demographics
Although home to a substantially larger population than Delaware, Pennsylvania has been a
relatively slow growing state. Census data show that Pennsylvania’s population increased
4.37% between 1990 and 2007i while Delaware’s population increased by 28%. Much of the
growth in both states is attributable to increases in the size of the Hispanic population.
Pennsylvania’s Hispanic population grew by 127.99% between 1990 and 2007 and Delaware’s
grew by 237.84%.ii
Figure 1: Total and Hispanic Population, 1990-2007
Total Population 2007 (3-yr) 2000 1990 Pct Chg
Berks 398,155 373,638 336,523 18.31%
Reading 80,951 81,201 78,380 3.28%
Lancaster 493,910 470,658 422,822 16.81%
Lancaster Cty 55,029 56,347 55,551 -0.94%
Lehigh 333,423 312,090 291,130 14.53%
Northampton 289,773 267,066 247,105 17.27%
Allentown 108,900 77,577 105,090 3.63%
Philadelphia 1,454,382 1,517,550 1,585,577 -8.27%
New Castle 524,682 500,265 441,946 18.72%
Pennsylvania 12,400,959 12,281,054 11,881,643 4.37%
Delaware 852,689 783,600 666,168 28.00%
Hispanic Persons 2007 (3-yr) 2000 1990 Pct Chg
Berks 50,825 36,096 17,174 195.94%
Reading 40,690 30,181 14,130 187.97%
Lancaster 33,323 26,451 15,639 113.08%
Lancaster Cty 17,842 17,224 10,981 62.48%
Lehigh 47,368 31,811 15,001 215.77%
Northampton 24,378 17,708 11,591 110.32%
Allentown 37,626 25,970 11,822 218.27%
Philadelphia 150,481 128,300 89,193 68.71%
New Castle 36,282 26,307 11,804 207.37%
Pennsylvania 529,525 394,088 232,262 127.99%
Delaware 53,447 37,277 15,820 237.84%
Total Population Less Hispanics 2007 (3-yr) 2000 1990 Pct Chg
Berks 347,330 337,542 319,349 8.76%
Reading 40,261 51,020 64,250 -37.34%
Lancaster 460,587 444,207 407,183 13.12%
Lancaster Cty 37,187 39,123 44,570 -16.56%
Lehigh 286,055 280,279 276,129 3.59%
Northampton 265,395 249,358 235,514 12.69%
Allentown 71,274 51,607 93,268 -23.58%
Philadelphia 1,303,901 1,389,250 1,496,384 -12.86%
New Castle 488,400 473,958 430,142 13.54%
Pennsylvania 11,871,434 11,886,966 11,649,381 1.91%
Delaware 799,242 746,323 650,348 22.89%
2
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
In raw numbers, the Hispanic population is largest in the City of Philadelphia, numbering over
150,000 in 2007. However as a percentage of the population, the Hispanic population is
greater in the cities of Reading, Allentown and Lancaster, as well as Lehigh and Berks
counties. Growth in the percentage Hispanic is most pronounced in the cities of Allentown
and Reading, and in Lehigh and Berks Counties.
Figure 2: Percent Hispanic of Total Population
2007 (3-yr) 2000 1990 Pct Chg
Berks 13% 10% 5% 150.13%
Reading 50% 37% 18% 178.82%
Lancaster 7% 6% 4% 82.41%
Lancaster Cty 32% 31% 20% 64.02%
Lehigh 14% 10% 5% 175.71%
Northampton 8% 7% 5% 79.35%
Allentown 35% 33% 11% 207.14%
Philadelphia 10% 8% 6% 83.93%
New Castle 7% 5% 3% 158.90%
Pennsylvania 4% 3% 2% 118.44%
Delaware 6% 5% 2% 163.94%
The specific origin of the Hispanic persons in these counties varies greatly. For example,
Hispanics of Mexican origin comprise almost 1-in-2 Hispanics in New Castle County and 1-
in-5 Hispanics in Berks County, but generally less than 1-in-10 in the other study counties.
Most frequently though, Hispanics in the study counties report Puerto Rican origins.
Figure 3: Specific Origin of Hispanic Persons
Specific Origin (2007 3-yr) Berks Lancaster Lehigh Northampton Philadelphia New Castle
Mexican 9,506 2,675 3,171 1,794 11,604 17,434
Puerto Rican 28,144 23,441 27,428 16,173 104,870 12,525
Cuban 631 1,000 724 408 2,508 873
Dominican 7,126 1,040 6,643 945 7,680 856
Central American 1,302 1,428 1,190 1,492 7,280 550
South American 1,501 2,448 1,974 2,102 8,494 2,781
Other Hispanic or Latino 2,615 1,291 6,238 1,464 8,045 1,263
Total Hispanic 50,825 33,323 47,368 24,378 150,481 36,282
Berks Lancaster Lehigh Northampton Philadelphia New Castle
Mexican 18.70% 8.03% 6.69% 7.36% 7.71% 48.05%
Puerto Rican 55.37% 70.34% 57.90% 66.34% 69.69% 34.52%
Cuban 1.24% 3.00% 1.53% 1.67% 1.67% 2.41%
Dominican 14.02% 3.12% 14.02% 3.88% 5.10% 2.36%
Central American 2.56% 4.29% 2.51% 6.12% 4.84% 1.52%
South American 2.95% 7.35% 4.17% 8.62% 5.64% 7.66%
Other Hispanic or Latino 5.15% 3.87% 13.17% 6.01% 5.35% 3.48%
With the exception of Lancaster County, all of the study counties experienced net
international migration rates greater than their relevant state rates – in some instances (e.g.,
Lehigh and Philadelphia counties), by a substantial amount.
3
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 4: Components of Population Change, 2000-2007
Total Population Vital Events Net Migration Net
Change; 2000- Natural Internal / International
Geographic Area
2007 Increase Births Deaths Total International Domestic Migration Rate
Berks County 28,317 9,528 35,803 26,275 20,313 4,394 15,919 11.29
Lancaster County 27,807 17,725 49,413 31,688 12,323 3,677 8,646 7.57
Lehigh County 25,253 6,185 29,089 22,904 20,432 5,758 14,674 17.74
Northampton County 26,453 3,295 22,215 18,920 22,980 3,388 19,592 12.02
Philadelphia County -67,916 38,219 156,888 118,669 -100,262 38,991 -139,253 26.55
Pennsylvania 151,738 114,795 1,050,424 935,629 83,889 128,305 -44,416 10.39
New Castle County 27,953 22,010 51,757 29,747 8,224 11,006 -2,782 21.27
Delaware 81,164 31,157 82,506 51,349 53,497 13,924 39,573 16.82
In terms of homeownership, nationally just over 50% of Hispanics own the homes in which
they live. This is higher than the rate for African Americans (46.7%), but lower than for
Whites (68.3%).iii
In the study cities and counties, except for Philadelphia which has a homeownership rate of
57.4%, the typical homeownership rate exceeds 70%. In 2007, the Black and Hispanic
homeownership rates in all study cities and counties were less than the White rates. In fact, in
no study city or county did the majority of Hispanic householders own the home in which
they live. Typically the Black and Hispanic homeownership rates are quite comparable.
Figure 5: Occupancy and Homeownership Rates
New Castle Wilmington Berks Reading Lancaster Lancaster Cty Lehigh Allentown Northampton Philadelphia
211,073 32363 159,367 34,585 192,308 22,679 136,518 44,906 115,684 660,244
Occupied 193,434 26690 149,410 29,471 185,001 21,031 129,391 40,838 109,164 557,985
Vacant 17,639 5673 9,957 5,114 7,307 1,648 7,127 4,068 6,520 102,259
Percent Vacant 8.36% 17.53% 6.25% 14.79% 3.80% 7.27% 5.22% 9.06% 5.64% 15.49%
Owner 138,742 13019 110,689 13,361 130,153 9,183 90,962 20,706 82,563 320,102
Renter 54,692 13671 38,721 16,110 54,848 11,848 38,429 20,132 26,601 237,883
Percent Owner-Occupied 71.73% 48.78% 74.08% 45.34% 70.35% 43.66% 70.30% 50.70% 75.63% 57.37%
White
Owner 111,687 7150 103,595 9,380 124,975 7,275 84,595 17,502 77,813 167,402
Renter 30,509 4836 30,065 9,007 47,084 8,080 28,259 12,165 21,652 96,924
Percent Owner-Occupied 78.54% 59.65% 77.51% 51.01% 72.63% 47.38% 74.96% 58.99% 78.23% 63.33%
Black
Owner 20,752 5413 2,655 1,395 1,515 804 1,669 998 1,600 122,068
Renter 20,165 8208 3,172 2,399 4,061 2,278 2,991 2,287 1,757 111,937
Percent Owner-Occupied 50.72% 39.74% 45.56% 36.77% 27.17% 26.09% 35.82% 30.38% 47.66% 52.16%
Hispanic
Owner 4,023 585 5,609 4,182 3,052 1,487 4,639 3,092 2,840 22,289
Renter 4,833 1285 8,489 7,617 7,207 4,156 9,004 7,816 3,950 23,095
Percent Owner-Occupied 45.43% 31.28% 39.79% 35.44% 29.75% 26.35% 34.00% 28.35% 41.83% 49.11%
Percent of Owners that are
Hispanic 2.90% 4.49% 5.07% 31.30% 2.34% 16.19% 5.10% 14.93% 3.44% 6.96%
Economically, across the nation, Hispanics and Blacks lag Whites in both median household
and family income. That said, although White and Black median household income nationally
was essentially unchanged between 2000 and 2007, there was modest growth in the average
for Hispanic households.
The same is not true of families, where all racial and ethnic groups experienced a rise in the
typical family income level, but Hispanic family increases lagged White and Black families.
4
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 6: US and State Median Household and Family Income, 2000 & 2007iv
US PA DE US PA DE
2000 2007 2000 2007 2000 2007
Median Household Income Percent Change; 2000-2007
Total $41,994 $50,007 $40,106 $47,913 $47,381 $55,303 19.08% 19.47% 16.72%
White $53,356 $53,000 $51,180 $50,545 $59,390 $59,144 -0.67% -1.24% -0.41%
Black $33,255 $33,407 $31,505 $30,167 $39,164 $42,190 0.46% -4.25% 7.73%
Hispanic $34,397 $39,852 $27,944 $31,391 $36,370 $41,366 15.86% 12.34% 13.74%
Median Family Income
Total $50,046 $60,374 $49,184 $60,243 $55,257 $66,828 20.64% 22.48% 20.94%
White $44,687 $64,832 $41,642 $63,098 $50,496 $72,180 45.08% 51.52% 42.94%
Black $29,423 $39,464 $27,415 $36,305 $35,517 $47,764 34.13% 32.43% 34.48%
Hispanic $33,676 $41,165 $26,930 $33,164 $36,290 $40,190 22.24% 23.15% 10.75%
In the study cities and counties, Hispanic households and families were the lowest income
group – by far. Moreover, the figures appear to lag both the national and relevant state figures
for both household and family income. Stated differently, Hispanics in the study cities and
counties live in households and families that are lower income than other groups, and they
have lower incomes than their fellow households and families in the states in which they live.
Figure 7: Median Household and Family Income, 2007
New Castle Berks Reading Lancaster Lancaster Cty Lehigh Allentown Northampton Philadelphia
Median Household Income
Total $61,045 $52,241 $27,047 $52,933 $31,599 $51,857 $26,630 $57,135 $34,767
White $66,055 $54,980 $27,734 $54,211 $33,032 $54,341 $38,973 $58,256 $44,564
Black $44,926 $34,934 $25,365 $29,848 $25,067 $37,077 $34,693 $51,172 $28,127
Hispanic $41,559 $27,422 $24,210 $29,037 $24,364 $31,326 $28,965 $33,807 $23,829
Median Family Income
Total $75,682 $61,446 $29,833 $63,499 $35,153 $63,851 $40,492 $67,505 $44,134
White $83,418 $64,451 $32,540 $65,043 $37,773 $68,622 $49,747 $70,158 $60,458
Black $51,497 $40,673 $31,466 $34,821 $30,256 $34,804 $33,106 $51,273 $34,180
Hispanic $42,447 $26,396 $23,643 $29,518 $24,831 $30,849 $28,638 $34,228 $24,901
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the unemployment rates by race and ethnicity for
states. We observe that the Hispanic rate is universally higher than the White rate and from
year to year, either higher or lower than the Black unemployment rate. We also observe that
there is greater volatility in the Hispanic rate than in the rates for either Black or White
participants in the labor force.
Figure 8: Unemployment Rate, 2000-2008.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
PA-White 3.6 4.3 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.4 4.3 4.0 4.9
PA-Black 10.0 9.8 11.9 11.3 11.8 10.8 8.2 6.4 8.7
PA-Hispanic 5.4 9.2 8.2 8.7 8.0 7.2 8.8 7.8 13.8
DE-White 3.4 3.1 3.7 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.0 3.2 4.1
DE-Black 6.0 5.1 6.8 7.2 6.1 8.1 5.5 4.5 8.1
DE-Hispanic 8.4 3.0 8.5 6.5 5.5 4.9 4.0 5.9 6.3
Generally reflective of the state data, the Hispanic unemployment rate is substantially higher
than the rate for White labor force participants. We observe that the Black unemployment rate
is higher than the Hispanic rate (in some instances, quite substantially), except in Berks
County where the Hispanic rate is 2.5 percentage points higher. We also observe that the
urban unemployment rates are substantially higher than their respective rural/suburban
county rates.
5
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 9: Unemployment Rate in Study Cities and Counties, 2007
White Black Hispanic
Berks 4.8% 9.3% 11.8%
Reading 6.2% 13.3% 12.8%
Lancaster 3.6% 11.0% 9.2%
Lancaster Cty 8.7% 14.0% 9.7%
Lehigh 5.3% 17.3% 12.4%
Allentown 7.2% 17.3% 12.6%
Northampton 4.4% 15.3% 11.7%
Philadelphia 7.2% 17.5% 13.2%
New Castle 4.9% 8.2% 6.7%
The American Housing Survey has a wealth of information about the financial condition of
homeowners in the United States; these data can be viewed for Hispanic households
separately. The limitation of these data is that the samples get quite small as we attempt to
analyze smaller and smaller geographic areas (e.g., metropolitan areas) and as the constellation
of characteristics gets more complex. The data reported in Appendix 1 provides a good
national profile of Hispanic homeowners. We observe the following from these data:
• Hispanic owners, compared to the universe of owners and to Black owners, spend a
higher percentage of their income on housing costs.
• Hispanic owners on average live in higher valuedv homes than the universe or Black
owners. However, this may be influenced by the areas in which the Hispanic
population is large and housing prices are high (e.g., Southern California).
• Hispanics owners acquired their homes more recently than Black owners or the
universe of owners. Over 55% of Hispanic owners acquired their homes since 2000
compared to 41.4% of Black owners and 43.3% of all owners.
• Hispanic owners typically made smaller down payments on their homes than Black
owners or the universe of homeowners. Almost 65% of Hispanics made a down
payment of ten percent or less on their homes; this compares to 50.2% of Black
owners and 49.2% of the universe of owners.
• Hispanic owners have primarily two down payment sources: (1) sale of a previous
home (22%); (2) savings or cash on hand (55.5%). Compared to Black owners,
Hispanics were more likely to have had a previous home to sell and less likely to have
savings or cash on hand. Compared to the universe of owners, Hispanics were less
likely to have had a previous home and more likely to use savings or cash.
6
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
• Hispanic owners, compared to Black owners, were more likely to have more than one
mortgage on their home but less likely than the universe of owners. The typical
primary loan on the home was a fixed payment self-amortizing loan, but both
Hispanic and Black owners were slightly less likely than the universe to have this type
of loan.
• Consistent with the year people acquired their homes, more than three-quarters of
Hispanics had their primary mortgage originated in 2000 or more recently, and nearly
40% obtained their primary mortgage in 2005 or more recently.
• Finally, proportionately fewer Hispanic and Black owners (compared to all
homeowners) have greater levels of equity in their homes as evidenced by somewhat
higher concentrations of households in the higher current loan-to-value ratios.
III. Mortgage Originations
The collapse of the subprime market and the resulting community carnage left in its path is
now well chronicled – and it need not be repeated here. But in order to understand how this
has impacted Hispanics in our communities, one needs to understand with some detail the
kind of loans Hispanic owners and borrowers received in recent years. Thus, our exploration
for any differences in local lending patterns will use HMDA data from 2004 through 2007,
inclusive.
Most striking about the data is the declining number of applications between 2006 and 2007.
This phenomenon is documented by the Federal Reserve in their annual report on HMDA
data.vi Also notable is the different pattern of Hispanic applicants/borrowers with respect to
purchase and refinance activity. Invariably a higher percentage of loans originated to Hispanics
are for the purchase of a home rather than the refinance of an existing mortgage.vii
7
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 10: Applications, Originations and Denials in US, 2004-2007
2004 2005 2006 2007 Percent Change: '06-'07
Originations Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance
White 3,561,649 4,416,582 4,417,659 4,518,413 4,221,676 3,954,798 2,973,940 3,080,751 -29.56% -22.10%
Black 341,552 440,425 483,693 497,872 513,258 482,220 290,521 326,016 -43.40% -32.39%
Hispanic 641,750 622,315 836,578 653,813 832,265 607,955 411,791 410,882 -50.52% -32.42%
2004 2005 2006 2007 Percent Change: '06-'07
Denials Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance
White 669,693 1,713,378 919,710 1,973,245 1,008,547 2,021,061 755,441 846,210 -25.10% -58.13%
Black 64,482 382,537 212,522 440,858 277,886 460,439 185,848 444,365 -33.12% -3.49%
Hispanic 190,635 322,559 284,841 361,798 355,429 405,366 230,740 439,738 -35.08% 8.48%
2004 2005 2006 2007 Percent Change: '06-'07
Applications Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance
White 5,058,100 8,181,663 6,566,516 8,841,454 6,438,510 8,762,038 4,585,133 6,683,589 -28.79% -23.72%
Black 614,257 1,140,838 918,952 1,315,523 1,026,227 1,409,079 608,231 1,035,950 -40.73% -26.48%
Hispanic 1,052,655 1,310,218 1,453,463 1,422,349 1,529,746 1,516,928 840,309 1,165,008 -45.07% -23.20%
2004 2005 2006 2007 Percent Change: '06-'07
Percent Denied Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance Purchase Refinance
White 13.24% 20.94% 14.01% 22.32% 15.66% 23.07% 16.48% 12.66% 5.18% -45.11%
Black 10.50% 33.53% 23.13% 33.51% 27.08% 32.68% 30.56% 42.89% 12.84% 31.27%
Hispanic 18.11% 24.62% 19.60% 25.44% 23.23% 26.72% 27.46% 37.75% 18.18% 41.25%
Percent Purchase of all
Originations 2004 2005 2006 2007
White 44.64% 49.44% 51.63% 49.12%
Black 43.68% 49.28% 51.56% 47.12%
Hispanic 50.77% 56.13% 57.79% 50.06%
A familiar pattern of differential denial by racial/ethnic status can be observed in the study
cities and counties. Looking first at purchase money mortgages we find that, invariably, Black
and Hispanic applicants have higher denial rates than Whites; Asian applicants have denial
rates that are similar to – sometimes a bit higher or lower – to White applicants. Comparing
Black to Hispanic applicants though reveals a less clear pattern. From year-to-year, city-to-city
and county-to-county, the denial experience of Black and Hispanic applicants varies. What is
clear though, again county-to-county and year-to-year, is that Black and Hispanic applicants
are substantially more likely to be denied than Whites. A similar pattern is observed with
mortgage refinances except that in all cases – White, Black, and Hispanic – the denial rates are
substantially higher.
8
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 11: Originations and Denials in Study Counties, 2004-2007
9
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 12: Percentages of Applications Denied for Study Cities, 2007
Percent Denied Purchase
White Black Hispanic
Allentown 17.3% 23.1% 21.6%
Bethlehem 12.3% 17.0% 17.7%
Lancaster Cty 11.6% 14.4% 14.6%
Reading 18.9% 24.7% 21.2%
Wilmington 13.9% 26.4% 15.6%
Percent Denied Refinance
White Black Hispanic
Allentown 33.0% 43.9% 38.8%
Bethlehem 28.4% 37.2% 39.4%
Lancaster Cty 34.5% 50.0% 46.5%
Reading 41.7% 62.8% 47.2%
Wilmington 26.7% 43.7% 32.0%
Percent Purchase of all Originations
White Black Hispanic
Allentown 51.1% 56.9% 62.7%
Bethlehem 46.0% 49.4% 49.0%
Lancaster Cty 61.8% 59.0% 69.1%
Reading 59.5% 58.8% 69.3%
Wilmington 57.2% 50.1% 58.0%
HMDA data also reflect the income and loan amounts for borrowers. These data, reported for
2007 in Figure 13, show that Hispanic borrowers typically have lower incomes than non-
Hispanic borrowers and similarly borrow less money for the purchase of homes or refinance
of their existing mortgages. However the differences are not proportionate. The data show
that typically, Hispanics borrow an amount that is higher in relation to their income than non-
Hispanics borrow. This is evidenced by the higher ratios of loan amount to income.viii
Typically, any ratio in excess of 3.0 could be considered high. Not only are the averages higher
for Hispanics, but so too are the extremes of the Hispanic populations across counties. Thus,
25% of Hispanic homebuyers in Lehigh County borrowed 3.38 (or more) times their annual
income compared to a ratio of 3.07 (or more) for borrowers that are not Hispanic; 10% of
Hispanic homebuyers in Lehigh County borrowed 4.06 times their annual income compared
to 3.75 for homebuyers who are not Hispanic.
10
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 13: Income, Loan Amount and Ratio of Loan Amount to Income, 2007
Berks Lancaster Lehigh Northampton Philadelphia New Castle
Hispanic
Purchase
Income ($000)
Median $39.0 $42.0 $48.0 $60.0 $39.0 $53.5
75th Pctl $58.0 $62.0 $68.0 $87.0 $59.0 $76.3
90th Pctl $81.7 $89.0 $98.0 $122.8 $87.0 $114.7
Loan Amount ($000)
Median $63.5 $99.0 $118.0 $139.0 $90.0 $167.0
75th Pctl $110.0 $140.3 $152.0 $200.0 $132.0 $209.3
90th Pctl $166.0 $199.7 $207.0 $269.6 $188.7 $285.6
Ratio:Loan Amt-Income
Median 2.06 2.50 2.62 2.58 2.63 3.23
75th Pctl 2.80 3.19 3.38 3.33 3.37 4.29
90th Pctl 3.46 3.96 4.06 3.96 4.08 5.06
Refinance
Income ($000)
Median $50.0 $51.0 $51.5 $57.0 $48.0 $62.5
75th Pctl $72.0 $73.0 $72.0 $84.0 $70.0 $90.0
90th Pctl $98.0 $99.7 $101.7 $119.2 $106.0 $131.5
Loan Amount ($000)
Median $61.0 $89.0 $100.5 $114.0 $79.0 $150.0
75th Pctl $108.5 $132.5 $140.3 $178.5 $121.0 $202.0
90th Pctl $169.0 $175.4 $189.7 $265.2 $184.0 $277.9
Ratio:Loan Amt-Income
Median 1.49 1.98 1.94 2.22 1.77 2.49
75th Pctl 2.29 2.64 3.00 3.15 2.69 3.41
90th Pctl 3.00 3.56 3.82 3.79 3.56 4.23
Not Hispanic
Purchase
Income ($000)
Median $69.0 $63.0 $73.0 $76.0 $65.0 $74.0
75th Pctl $96.0 $91.0 $108.0 $110.0 $102.0 $110.0
90th Pctl $135.0 $135.0 $155.0 $155.0 $171.0 $159.0
Loan Amount ($000)
Median $134.0 $142.0 $158.0 $166.5 $128.0 $193.0
75th Pctl $189.0 $190.0 $220.0 $230.0 $197.0 $258.0
90th Pctl $250.0 $255.0 $306.0 $309.0 $296.0 $345.0
Ratio:Loan Amt-Income
Median 2.09 2.31 2.26 2.27 2.22 2.73
75th Pctl 2.83 3.12 3.07 3.05 3.09 3.65
90th Pctl 3.52 3.97 3.75 3.83 3.91 4.56
Refinance
Income ($000)
Median $70.0 $67.0 $71.0 $73.0 $60.0 $75.0
75th Pctl $96.0 $93.0 $100.0 $102.0 $90.0 $106.0
90th Pctl $130.0 $126.0 $146.0 $144.0 $141.0 $147.0
Loan Amount ($000)
Median $104.0 $109.0 $111.0 $120.0 $100.0 $158.0
75th Pctl $165.5 $164.0 $173.0 $188.0 $151.5 $223.0
90th Pctl $231.0 $228.0 $252.0 $267.0 $220.0 $304.1
Ratio:Loan Amt-Income
Median 1.61 1.65 1.69 1.79 1.74 2.27
75th Pctl 2.56 2.64 2.67 2.74 2.63 3.26
90th Pctl 3.39 3.52 3.52 3.63 3.54 4.13
11
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Looking next at the pricing of purchase money mortgages obtained by those borrowers who
were approved, we observe that in comparison to White applicants, Black and Hispanic
applicants were substantially more likely to obtain loans with subprime pricing.ix Generally,
subprime borrowing was proportionately more frequent among Black borrowers. The
likelihood that an Asian borrower received a higher priced loan was generally similar to that of
White borrowers – again, sometimes slightly higher or lower. Consistent with what we know
about the national decline in subprime lending, the data for the study counties also show that
subprime lending dropped off substantially for all groups in 2007.
Some of the areas were remarkably high in terms of subprime lending. For example, the level
of subprime lending in Berks and Lehigh counties in 2005 and 2006 for Black and Hispanic
borrowers exceeded 40%. In almost all instances, the percent of Hispanic buyers in the study
cities receiving subprime loans exceeded their county percentages. While the same can be said
for White and Black buyers, in all instances, Hispanic buyers had higher subprime percentages
than White buyers.
A similar pattern is observed in the refinance group of mortgage originations. Generally the
likelihood that people obtained mortgage refinances that were subprime was greater than
subprime loans for the purchase of a home. Generally, across all years and counties, both
Black and Hispanic borrowers were more likely to obtain subprime mortgage refinances than
were White borrowers. And typically, Black borrowers were more likely than Hispanics to
obtain these higher priced loans. As before, the percent of owners getting subprime refinance
loans in the study cities exceeded the county percentages. And in all instances, the percent of
Hispanic owners getting subprime refinances exceeded the percent of White buyers getting
the higher priced loans. For both purchase and refinance loans – and for all races and
ethnicities – the percent of borrowers receiving subprime loans in 2007 was higher in the cities
than their respective counties.
Figure 14: Percent of Originated Loans that were Higher Priced, 2004-2007
2004 2005 2006 2007
Purchase White Asian Black Hispanic White Asian Black Hispanic White Asian Black Hispanic White Asian Black Hispanic
New Castle 9.0% 4.1% 22.7% 15.9% 15.3% 9.1% 40.4% 28.4% 16.9% 8.3% 41.4% 27.7% 9.9% 6.5% 25.4% 13.6%
Berks 10.7% 12.2% 27.0% 23.5% 20.5% 19.5% 50.4% 41.3% 22.5% 23.2% 50.3% 43.4% 13.6% 9.9% 30.9% 31.3%
Lancaster 8.2% 4.4% 16.2% 13.9% 14.0% 5.4% 37.6% 27.6% 13.4% 18.5% 34.0% 25.4% 9.8% 7.4% 27.7% 19.7%
Lehigh 11.5% 9.1% 28.6% 24.9% 23.1% 13.9% 44.0% 44.9% 24.8% 15.1% 52.5% 49.8% 16.1% 8.8% 33.0% 36.1%
Northampton 10.6% 3.0% 17.5% 19.1% 16.8% 7.9% 40.5% 35.2% 18.1% 14.5% 43.2% 34.2% 11.8% 7.2% 29.6% 26.8%
Philadelphia 11.5% 3.9% 27.1% 16.0% 21.6% 10.0% 47.8% 36.2% 25.0% 14.4% 52.2% 40.7% 16.1% 9.8% 36.5% 30.4%
2004 2005 2006 2007
Refinance White Asian Black Hispanic White Asian Black Hispanic White Asian Black Hispanic White Asian Black Hispanic
New Castle 14.2% 8.8% 29.2% 23.5% 21.8% 13.5% 43.2% 31.2% 24.2% 18.2% 49.6% 36.2% 18.1% 14.2% 36.3% 26.8%
Berks 12.8% 16.2% 24.4% 22.9% 18.9% 25.6% 39.7% 32.8% 23.1% 21.4% 50.9% 37.1% 18.1% 16.1% 35.8% 32.9%
Lancaster 11.7% 7.3% 30.1% 19.4% 17.1% 12.2% 40.4% 25.9% 19.9% 17.2% 34.3% 34.1% 14.0% 18.4% 30.0% 24.9%
Lehigh 10.5% 3.1% 20.6% 21.0% 16.4% 16.4% 49.4% 35.1% 22.3% 17.9% 46.7% 44.3% 16.1% 20.9% 36.4% 33.4%
Northampton 10.7% 12.3% 18.7% 18.5% 18.0% 18.1% 36.3% 37.9% 20.6% 11.6% 41.4% 32.1% 15.8% 6.3% 28.4% 26.0%
Philadelphia 18.4% 16.9% 35.9% 29.8% 26.5% 24.7% 51.1% 41.5% 30.8% 30.3% 58.8% 48.3% 22.1% 17.9% 46.2% 34.3%
It is appropriate to mention that scholars and practitioners generally point out a few things
about interpretation of the HMDA data. First, the observed differential denial rates is a fact.
However, the HMDA data do not give us everything we need to determine whether the
difference is reasonable given the totality of the circumstances presented by the borrower and
the transaction. Second, the observed differences in pricing is similarly a fact. But again,
whether someone “deserved” a higher priced loan requires a more thorough analysis of the
12
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
borrower/transaction – which the HMDA data do not permit.x Having said that, there is
mounting evidence that many borrowers who could have qualified for prime mortgages ended
up with higher priced subprime loans.xi That evidence also suggests that this phenomenon was
more frequent for lower income and minority borrowers.
Figure 15: Percent of Originated Loans that were Higher Priced in Study Cities, 2007
Purchase
White Black Hispanic
Allentown 31.0% 34.6% 40.4%
Bethlehem 13.7% 41.5% 22.8%
Lancaster Cty 13.6% 37.7% 23.3%
Reading 30.0% 35.0% 33.4%
Wilmington 15.0% 36.9% 25.0%
Refinance
White Black Hispanic
Allentown 25.3% 44.8% 35.8%
Bethlehem 21.1% 23.8% 29.1%
Lancaster Cty 21.1% 30.5% 35.3%
Reading 38.8% 39.3% 42.3%
Wilmington 16.9% 47.0% 31.0%
Appendix 2 displays the top 10 most active lenders for each community within the study
counties. Market shares are shown separately by ethnicity of borrower and purpose of loan.
IV. Homeowners’ Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program
Pennsylvania has a one-of-a-kind program designed to help homeowners who are in danger of
losing their homes through foreclosure. That program is called HEMAP, or the Homeowners’
Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program. Created through an Act of the Pennsylvania
Legislature (Act 91) and administered by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency (PHFA),
HEMAP provides assistance to Pennsylvanians who, through no fault of their own, are in
danger of losing their home through foreclosure.xii Applicants make applications to the PHFA
through approved housing counseling agencies. [See Appendix 3 for a complete and current
listing of PHFA-approved HEMAP counseling agencies in study counties.]
Using data on applications received in calendar years 2004 through mid-2008xiii, we observe
that overall application volumes increased by 27.6%. Our observation of the data shows that
there has been an increasing propensity for there to be missing race/ethnicity information
about HEMAP applicants. In all likelihood, counseling agencies submitting applications on
behalf of homeowners simply did not complete the racial/ethnic identification field in the
majority of the cases. This missing data problem, to a certain extent, is mitigated by our
process of identifying applicants as Hispanic based on their surname; but this data problem
13
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
makes it difficult to identify trends among White and Black applicants, especially as those
trends may/may not depart from the trend for Hispanics. The volume of applications
attributed to Hispanics seems to have increased at a rate just slightly above the overall increase
in applications.
Figure 16: HEMAP Application Volume by Race and Hispanic Origin - Pennsylvania
Year Application Received Percent Change
Race/Ethnicity 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2004-2008
White 3,491 3,181 3,157 990 558 -84.0%
Black 1,432 1,296 1,424 418 252 -82.4%
Hispanic 398 376 462 463 514 29.1%
Asian 13 28 43 10 4 -69.2%
Other/Unknown 3,291 4,159 4,767 8,632 9,674 194.0%
Total 8,625 9,040 9,853 10,513 11,002 27.6%
Pct Hispanic 4.6% 4.2% 4.7% 4.4% 4.7%
In the study counties, we observe substantial variation in the volume and share of applications
from Hispanic applicants. Here too, we observe substantial numbers of applications for which
race/ethnicity was not identified. And so, as noted above, it is difficult to render any
judgments about trends in Hispanic applicants. Figure 17 shows both the study counties and
the major cities within those counties. Invariably we find that those cities, compared to their
respective counties, have higher percentages of applications from Hispanic homeowners.
14
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 17: HEMAP Application Volume by Race and Hispanic Origin – Study Cities and
Counties
Year Application Received
County/City Race/Ethnicity
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Berks White 140 110 104 35 20
Black 24 20 17 5 4
Hispanic 39 29 31 34 30
Total 258 238 241 293 256
Pct Hispanic 15.1% 12.2% 12.9% 11.6% 11.7%
Reading White 52 43 36 12 8
Black 19 16 12 5 2
Hispanic 32 19 25 27 26
Total 123 109 98 128 104
Pct Hispanic 26.0% 17.4% 25.5% 21.1% 25.0%
Lancaster White 35 116 125 12 4
Black 1 14 12 2 0
Hispanic 18 30 32 24 28
Total 208 251 244 250 296
Pct Hispanic 8.7% 12.0% 13.1% 9.6% 9.5%
Lancaster Cty White 4 49 42 4 6
Black 0 13 8 0 0
Hispanic 15 26 26 19 18
Total 84 124 104 99 104
Pct Hispanic 17.9% 21.0% 25.0% 19.2% 17.3%
Lehigh White 99 62 70 15 12
Black 12 12 11 2 2
Hispanic 39 28 28 38 52
Total 214 175 197 213 302
Pct Hispanic 18.2% 16.0% 14.2% 17.8% 17.2%
Allentown White 41 23 28 11 10
Black 9 8 10 1 0
Hispanic 30 21 20 30 42
Total 105 88 99 111 142
Pct Hispanic 28.6% 23.9% 20.2% 27.0% 29.6%
Northampton White 72 108 89 27 6
Black 7 11 18 8 0
Hispanic 19 17 24 17 26
Total 139 186 203 233 292
Pct Hispanic 13.7% 9.1% 11.8% 7.3% 8.9%
Philadelphia White 156 110 113 44 22
Black 678 559 684 200 126
Hispanic 116 92 126 135 150
Total 1,519 1,480 1,646 1,881 1,824
Pct Hispanic 7.6% 6.2% 7.7% 7.2% 8.2%
In the study counties, the data show that the application approval rates rose significantly from
around 11% in the 2004 through 2005 time period to approximately 18% in the 2006 through
2008 period. Every race/ethnic group – except for Hispanics in Lancaster County – saw
increases in the percentage of applications approved. Interesting to note that in the 2006-2008
period, the percent of Hispanic applicants that was approved is equal to (or higher than) the
percent of White applicants approved in all but Lancaster County.
15
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Letters of Circumstance
from Selected Hispanic Applicants to the HEMAP Program
16
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 18: Percent of HEMAP Applications Approved by Race and Hispanic Origin – Study
Cities and Counties
Percent of Applications Approved
White Black Hispanic Total
Berks 9.8% 7.4% 12.8% 11.4%
Reading 11.6% 3.8% 12.1% 11.6%
Lancaster 13.1% 24.1% 11.0% 14.8%
Lancaster Cty 10.0% 19.0% 10.5% 13.6%
Lehigh 9.5% NA 12.6% 10.5%
Allentown 13.0% 7.1% 10.7% 11.6%
Northampton 13.4% 18.2% 14.4% 14.1%
Philadelphia 12.9% 15.2% 12.5% 15.4%
Percent of Applications Approved by Year Action Taken
2004-2005 2006-2008 Percent Change
White Black Hispanic Total White Black Hispanic Total White Black Hispanic Total
Berks 8.3% 8.3% 7.3% 8.6% 11.6% 6.3% 16.7% 13.4% 39.8% -24.1% 128.8% 55.8%
Reading 13.5% 7.1% 5.0% 9.9% 9.7% 0.0% 16.2% 12.9% -28.1% -100.0% 224.0% 30.3%
Lancaster 10.0% 33.3% 5.7% 11.9% 15.0% 20.0% 14.1% 17.0% 50.0% -39.9% 147.4% 42.9%
Lancaster Cty 8.1% 42.9% 6.9% 13.5% 11.1% 7.1% 12.7% 14.3% 37.0% -83.4% 84.1% 5.9%
Lehigh 8.1% 10.0% 11.8% 6.9% 11.4% 5.6% 13.3% 13.1% 40.7% NA 12.7% 89.9%
Allentown 15.1% 6.7% 10.3% 9.6% 11.3% 7.7% 11.3% 13.2% -25.2% 14.9% 9.7% 37.5%
Northampton 10.4% 15.4% 8.3% 9.6% 16.4% 19.4% 17.2% 16.6% 58.1% 26.0% 107.2% 72.9%
Philadelphia 9.6% 12.5% 4.8% 11.3% 16.2% 17.7% 16.8% 18.2% 68.8% 41.6% 250.0% 61.1%
Figure 19 depicts the combined set of (up to) three reasons applicants to HEMAP submitted
as descriptive of the basis for their mortgage delinquency.xiv There are not remarkable
differences in reasons by race/ethnicity or county – which suggests that the precursors to
foreclosure for those seeking HEMAP assistance are fairly consistent. What is remarkable is
the overwhelming influence of the layoff/loss of income and underemployment for all groups
and all counties. This is, in part, a result of the natural filtering of applicants to HEMAP based
on the terms of program eligibility. However, it also portends the increasing need for HEMAP
assistance for all groups as the economy deteriorates.
17
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Letters of Circumstance
from Selected Hispanic Applicants to the HEMAP Program
18
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 19: Reasons HEMAP Assistance is Sought by Race and Hispanic Origin – Approved
Applicants in Study Counties
Layoff-Loss Under- Extraordinary Other/
of Income employment Medical Marital Expenses 9-11 Unknown
White
Berks 74.4% 17.9% 38.5% 12.8% 20.5% 2.6% 0.0%
Lancaster 68.4% 18.4% 31.6% 13.2% 28.9% 0.0% 0.0%
Lehigh 70.8% 8.3% 45.8% 8.3% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Northamton 65.0% 15.0% 32.2% 12.5% 32.5% 0.0% 0.0%
Philadelphia 71.4% 8.9% 39.3% 5.4% 21.4% 0.0% 1.8%
Black
Berks 80.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 60.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Lancaster 14.2% 14.3% 57.1% 0.0% 42.9% 0.0% 0.0%
Lehigh 33.3% 0.0% 66.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Northamton 50.0% 0.0% 37.5% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Philadelphia 62.8% 7.6% 31.1% 7.6% 32.3% 0.0% 4.8%
Hispanic
Berks 47.4% 0.0% 31.6% 31.6% 31.6% 0.0% 0.0%
Lancaster 76.9% 15.4% 30.8% 23.1% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0%
Lehigh 70.0% 20.0% 15.0% 25.0% 30.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Northamton 53.8% 15.4% 30.8% 7.7% 30.8% 0.0% 0.0%
Philadelphia 57.4% 4.4% 26.5% 7.4% 35.3% 0.0% 7.4%
Hispanic applicants (statewide) that have been approved for HEMAP assistance have had -
and continue to have - larger mortgages than their Black and White counterparts. The
differences are closing as the average for Hispanics is declining while the averages for White
and Black applicants are increasing. Commensurate with the mortgage amount is the typical
monthly payment.
19
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Letters of Circumstance
from Selected Hispanic Applicants to the Letters of Circumstance
HEMAP Program
from Selected Hispanic
Applicants to the
HEMAP Program
20
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 20: Average Mortgage Amounts of Borrowers Seeking HEMAP Assistance by Race
and Hispanic Origin - Statewide
Median Monthly Payment of Approved Applicants
Year Application Received White Black Hispanic Total
2004 $663.50 $576.00 $745.00 $647.00
2005 $755.00 $601.00 $792.00 $701.00
2006 $814.50 $624.00 $761.50 $714.00
2007 $918.50 $822.00 $718.00 $783.00
2008 $721.00 $675.00 $946.00 $861.00
Median Monthly Payment of Approved Applicants
Year Final Action Taken White Black Hispanic Total
2004 $650.00 $539.00 $749.00 $633.50
2005 $726.00 $617.00 $715.00 $668.00
2006 $817.50 $615.00 $807.50 $706.50
2007 $853.50 $736.50 $736.00 $783.00
2008 $798.00 $725.00 $885.50 $854.00
Median Mortgage Amount of Approved Applicants
Year Application Received White Black Hispanic Total
2004 $90,000.00 $70,000.00 $130,000.00 $82,700.00
2005 $95,000.00 $76,000.00 $103,000.00 $90,000.00
2006 $109,500.00 $80,000.00 $120,000.00 $100,000.00
2007 $110,500.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $100,000.00
2008 NA NA NA NA
Median Mortgage Amount of Approved Applicants
Year Final Action Taken White Black Hispanic Total
2004 $90,000.00 $67,000.00 $132,500.00 $83,000.00
2005 $90,000.00 $69,000.00 $103,000.00 $86,000.00
2006 $110,000.00 $80,000.00 $115,000.00 $98,000.00
2007 $110,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00
2008 NA NA NA NA
21
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Letters of Circumstance
from Selected Hispanic Applicants to the HEMAP Program
22
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
V. Characteristics of Homeowners in Foreclosure
As there is no specific owner demographic information that can be attributed to people in
foreclosure, TRF created a list of Spanish surnames. This list was based on a number of
sources – notably the HEMAP database that included borrower name and racial/ethnic
identity. We expect that this is an imperfect representation because: (1) it is likely that there are
Hispanic borrowers who do not have readily identifiable Spanish surnames; (2) there are
individuals with Spanish surnames who are not Hispanic. Although imperfect, if we are to try
and understand the differential circumstances of borrowers facing foreclosure, there was no
alternative.
Figure 21: Foreclosure Filings by Hispanic Origin
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic
Berks 153 977 153 809 120 788 114 921 190 1,208
Reading 128 372 127 267 89 222 80 190 118 258
Lancaster 83 797 86 758 93 804 83 802 96 1,010
Lancaster Cty 56 149 63 159 56 183 53 135 50 144
Lehigh 96 440 61 385 62 383 117 485 238 656
Allentown 83 222 51 173 49 140 90 187 196 286
Northampton NA NA NA NA 6 89 21 189 10 184
Philadelphia NA NA 530 4,565 573 4,713 604 5,792 634 7,358
New Castle NA NA NA NA 7 260 20 838 14 1,486
Wilmington NA NA NA NA NA 90 3 304 10 522
We observe the following for filing data between 2004 and 2008:
• Typically, the percent Hispanic of all owners in foreclosure is higher in the cities than
the respective counties – typically, the percent is at least two- to three-times as high.
• We see relative stability in the percent Hispanic of owners in foreclosure, with some
interim fluctuation, between 2004 and 2008. Notable though is the substantial rise in
the percent Hispanic of all owners in foreclosure in Allentown, where the percentage
increased by almost 50%. To a lesser extent, the rise in the percent Hispanic is up
approximately 22% in Reading.
• Declines are observed in the City of Wilmington and New Castle County – although
the time period is abbreviated by a lack of data.
• Philadelphia too has experienced a decline (24%) in the percent Hispanic of owners in
foreclosure, although that too is over a slightly abbreviated time period.
23
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 22: Percent Hispanic of Owners in Foreclosure
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Berks 13.5% 15.9% 13.2% 11.0% 13.6%
Reading 25.6% 32.2% 28.6% 29.6% 31.4%
Lancaster 9.4% 10.2% 10.4% 9.4% 8.7%
Lancaster Cty 27.3% 28.4% 23.4% 28.2% 25.8%
Lehigh 17.9% 13.7% 13.9% 19.4% 26.6%
Allentown 27.2% 22.8% 25.9% 32.5% 40.7%
Northampton NA NA 6.3% 10.0% 5.2%
Philadelphia NA 10.4% 10.8% 9.4% 7.9%
New Castle NA NA 2.6% 2.3% 0.9%
Wilmington NA NA NA 1.0% 1.9%
Figure 23: Comparison of the Percent of Owners that are Hispanic and the Percent of
Foreclosure Filings Attributed to Hispanic Owners
Percent Hispanic Among All Owners (2007) and Owners in Foreclosure
(all years for which foreclosure data are available combined)
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Berks Reading Lancaster Lancaster Lehigh Allentown Northampton Philadelphia New Castle Wilmington
Cty
Owners Foreclosures
The following section of the report relies upon the merger of two different databases: (1) the
foreclosure filings database from either the county or RealtyTrac (New Castle and
Northampton counties); and (2) the RealQuest database detailing the mortgage and sale
transaction history of properties. Matching these two databases is imperfect because there is
no single consistent key data item in both files that can be compared for this purpose. Instead,
we rely on a match based on the address of the collateral property – which may be entered
inconsistently across the two databases. That said, we were able to achieve a match between
the two databases at a very high rate (i.e., as low as 85.2% in Northampton County and as
24
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
high as 97.2% in New Castle County). Given that we found a match between the two
databases, we then needed to identify which loan in the property’s overall loan history is the
one subject to the instant foreclosure filing. This is oftentimes a simple task because there is
only one loan in the loan history; other times, it is more difficult either because of the number
of loans, or because there are no loans documented in the database. As expected, the rate is
lower than the simple match rate. Nevertheless, except for the identification rate in
Northampton County, the rates are all sufficiently high for confidence in these results.
Figure 24: Match Results between Foreclosure Filing Databases and
Property History Database
Berks Lancaster Lehigh Northampton Philadelphia New Castle
Cases 3,942 2,862 2,017 640 20,782 1,913
With documents 3,465 2,739 1,906 545 19,381 1,859
Without documents 477 123 111 90 1,401 54
Pct with documents 87.90% 95.70% 94.50% 85.16% 93.26% 97.18%
Primary Loan Identified 2,877 2,467 1,661 153 16,444 1,102
Pct of all cases 72.98% 86.20% 82.35% 23.91% 79.13% 57.61%
Pct of cases w/documents 83.03% 90.07% 87.15% 28.07% 84.85% 59.28%
In general we observe that the percent of Hispanic owners facing foreclosure who have
purchase money mortgages (rather than mortgage refinances) is substantially higher than the
comparable rate for people that are not Hispanic. This pattern holds both for cities and their
surrounding counties.
Figure 25: Percent of Foreclosure Filings for Purchase Money Mortgages
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic
Berks 40.0% 27.6% 28.6% 22.9% 15.4% 19.7% 30.4% 16.1% 18.2% 18.4%
Reading 51.4% 43.4% 45.5% 32.1% 33.9% 31.7% 45.6% 31.2% 42.9% 26.4%
Lancaster 50.0% 39.6% 42.9% 45.6% 66.7% 42.0% 29.4% 41.3% 68.8% 48.6%
Lancaster City 74.2% 54.7% 65.9% 43.2% 48.5% 42.5% 66.7% 61.3% 65.0% 50.0%
Lehigh 71.4% 52.2% 33.3% 41.7% 42.9% 38.2% 55.0% 36.0% 66.7% 38.8%
Allentown 70.3% 60.3% 66.7% 56.2% 45.5% 43.7% 53.8% 47.0% 56.5% 52.7%
Northampton NA 61.5% NA 40.0% NA 46.7% NA 45.1% NA 38.1%
Philadelphia NA NA 55.3% 40.0% 47.1% 38.1% 49.1% 39.3% NA NA
New Castle NA 44.4% NA 51.5% 50.0% 49.6% 33.3% 43.9% NA 53.4%
Wilmington NA NA NA 44.4% NA 51.9% 0.0% 51.3% NA 42.2%
Hispanics facing foreclosure, compared to people that are not Hispanic, are typically less likely
to have conventional loans meaning that a higher percentage have government-insured
loans.xv By 2008, most of the observed difference between Hispanics and non-Hispanics on
this indicator disappeared. The general rise in the percent conventional of loans in foreclosure
is consistent with the market penetration of subprime loans, which were less likely to be
government-insured.
25
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 26: Percent of Foreclosure Filings for Conventional Loans
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic
Berks 60.0% 78.9% 64.3% 86.8% 84.6% 88.5% 95.7% 89.4% 90.9% 93.4%
Reading 73.0% 78.8% 72.7% 79.3% 81.4% 88.9% 71.9% 80.0% 83.3% 88.5%
Lancaster 70.0% 73.4% 57.1% 69.6% 71.4% 76.3% 82.4% 84.0% 75.0% 79.3%
Lancaster City 48.4% 69.3% 51.2% 67.9% 69.7% 74.2% 66.7% 76.3% 80.0% 80.4%
Lehigh 28.6% 73.1% 66.7% 81.3% 85.7% 87.9% 95.0% 91.6% 94.4% 90.7%
Allentown 54.7% 65.6% 59.0% 73.3% 60.6% 76.7% 86.2% 88.6% 83.9% 83.5%
Northampton NA NA NA NA NA 86.7% 71.4% 86.3% NA 76.2%
Philadelphia NA NA 59.6% 75.3% 71.7% 82.1% 78.4% 87.0% 76.7% 87.9%
Wilmington NA 80.0% NA 100.0% 0.0% 90.4% 100.0% 85.5% NA 87.3%
New Castle NA 55.6% NA 84.8% 50.0% 82.0% 91.7% 86.0% NA 86.6%
For all groups and areas, the percent of loans in a foreclosure status carrying adjustable
interest rates or balloon payments rose dramatically over time. Typically, Hispanics were less
likely than non-Hispanics to have this variety of mortgage, with a few exceptions (Lehigh
County and Allentown).
Figure 27: Percent of Foreclosure Filings for ARM/Balloon Loans
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic
Berks 13.3% 17.6% 21.4% 22.3% 50.0% 33.3% 34.8% 37.3% 40.9% 43.4%
Reading 12.2% 16.4% 14.3% 15.0% 11.9% 34.1% 21.1% 24.0% 38.1% 36.8%
Lancaster 30.0% 18.9% 21.4% 22.8% 28.6% 30.5% 29.4% 39.3% 18.8% 40.0%
Lancaster Cty 22.6% 18.7% 19.5% 22.2% 33.3% 30.0% 38.9% 32.3% 25.0% 39.1%
Lehigh 28.6% 17.9% 33.3% 32.6% 28.6% 35.0% 60.0% 46.7% 44.4% 41.1%
Allentown 12.5% 18.3% 25.6% 28.6% 30.3% 41.7% 55.4% 46.2% 41.9% 39.6%
Northampton NA NA NA NA NA 30.0% 42.9% 31.4% NA 19.1%
Philadelphia NA NA 17.5% 33.6% 35.2% 47.7% 50.3% 59.6% 57.9% 64.9%
New Castle NA NA NA NA 25.0% 51.1% 75.0% 54.0% NA 53.4%
Wilmington NA NA NA 33.3% 0.0% 38.5% 50.0% 41.9% NA 43.1%
Assuming that the borrower did have an adjustable interest rate or balloon payment loan, the
difference between Hispanic owners and owners who are not Hispanic is neither consistent
(i.e., Hispanics pay more or less than non-Hispanics), nor extraordinarily substantial. What is
notable in these data is that all owners in Philadelphia – Hispanic an non-Hispanic alike – paid
higher APRs than owners from other subject counties.
Figure 28: Median APR for ARM/Balloon Loans in a Foreclosure Status
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
County Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic
B erks 7.65 9.00 8.63 8.28 7.34 8.05 8.04 8.25 7.88 7.90
Reading 10.70 10.63 8.99 9.74 9.03 8.75 9.37 8.88 9.75 9.24
Lancaster 9.65 9.25 7.63 8.00 6.95 7.80 8.75 8.30 8.00 8.39
Lancaster City 9.25 9.25 8.20 8.35 8.22 8.59 8.50 8.39 9.50 8.31
Lehigh 9.90 8.72 9.21 8.29 8.05 8.25 7.91 8.55 8.08 8.03
Allentown 11.05 9.53 9.00 9.80 8.75 8.88 8.98 8.60 8.46 8.46
Northampton NA 8.00 NA 9.00 NA 8.44 NA 8.38 NA NA
Philadelphia NA NA 10.25 9.50 9.00 9.00 8.80 9.10 8.78 9.19
New Castle NA 9.58 NA 7.95 NA 8.13 7.31 8.10 7.36 7.98
Wilmington NA 7.95 NA 8.62 NA 7.85 7.99 8.08 12.38 8.18
With few exceptions, Hispanic owners, compared to non-Hispanic owners facing foreclosure,
appear to have had their loans for slightly longer; Lehigh County and Allentown are
exceptions. Differences are not substantial (typically less than a few months, on average).
What is also notable is that all owners – Hispanic and non-Hispanic – generally had their loans
longer in Philadelphia than the other subject counties.
26
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 29: Median Years for Foreclosure for Loans in a Foreclosure Status
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic Hispanic Not Hispanic
Berks 2.41 3.02 1.96 3.11 1.88 2.36 2.20 2.29 2.03 2.41
Reading 3.37 3.40 3.42 3.55 3.48 3.41 3.45 2.82 3.18 2.36
Lancaster 3.32 3.51 2.73 3.55 5.13 3.01 2.61 2.48 2.60 2.74
Lancaster City 4.35 3.31 3.54 4.44 3.19 3.54 2.61 3.18 2.09 2.80
Lehigh NA 3.72 NA 2.75 NA 2.73 1.39 2.05 2.15 2.73
Allentown 3.90 3.53 3.52 3.46 3.40 2.45 1.73 2.03 2.17 2.77
Northampton NA 3.83 NA 3.12 NA 3.81 1.04 1.95 NA NA
Philadelphia NA NA 4.73 4.71 4.79 4.52 3.07 2.34 4.03 3.40
New Castle NA NA NA 2.40 NA 2.36 1.44 2.09 NA 2.27
Wilmington NA NA NA 3.85 NA 3.32 NA 2.44 NA 2.87
VI. Distances to Counseling Agencies
For every foreclosure filing in each of the counties, a precise address was obtained and the
filing was placed on a map. Additionally, the precise location of all housing counseling
agencies approved by PHFA and HUD were similarly obtained and mapped. Then, using an
algorithm that calculates the straight-line distance between points, TRF computed the
distances between each foreclosure filing and the nearest housing counseling agency.xvi The
ethnicity of owners facing foreclosure is distinguished based on surname (Hispanic v. not-
Hispanic/unknown), and agencies are distinguished based on their capacity to provide
counseling service in Spanish.xvii
Firstly, access to housing counseling – as measured by distance – to people in foreclosure is
better in cities than in the remainder of their respective counties. Secondly, Hispanic owners
in foreclosure generally have equal or shorter average (i.e., median) distances to access housing
counseling resources. In some counties, Hispanics are substantially closer to counseling
resources, and that is especially so for those people who need service in Spanish language.
Having said that, there are differences in service accessibility across the counties. The
distances that owners in foreclosure need to traverse to access PHFA-certified housing
counseling agencies (especially an agency that can counsel in Spanish) in Lehigh and
Northampton counties are substantially greater than the other study counties. Spanish-
speaking owners facing foreclosure in Lehigh and Northampton counties have an especially
long distance to traverse; so too do Spanish-speaking clients in Allentown. This is an
important point for Spanish-speaking owners facing foreclosure in Pennsylvania because it is
only through a PHFA-certified agency that the HEMAP program may be accessed.
27
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 30: Median Distance of Owners in Foreclosure to Nearest Counseling Agency
Any PHFA Any HUD or PHFA
Any PHFA Agency; Spanish Any HUD or Agency; Spanish
County Area Agency Speaking PHFA Agency Speaking
Berks Not Hispanic 4.70 6.58 4.70 6.58
Rest of Berks
Hispanic 3.68 4.35 3.68 4.35
Not Hispanic 0.91 0.93 0.91 0.93
Reading
Hispanic 0.81 0.83 0.81 0.83
Lancaster Not Hispanic 9.63 10.08 9.63 10.07
Rest of Lancaster
Hispanic 5.26 5.43 5.26 5.43
Not Hispanic 0.55 0.80 0.55 0.76
Lancaster City
Hispanic 0.48 0.72 0.47 0.67
Lehigh Not Hispanic 5.68 9.44 4.41 5.01
Rest of Allentown
Hispanic 5.38 9.27 4.44 5.15
Not Hispanic 3.68 6.25 1.04 1.04
Allentown
Hispanic 3.52 6.22 0.77 0.77
Northampton Not Hispanic 5.76 7.54 1.89 6.09
Northampton
Hispanic 7.26 7.36 1.90 6.93
Philadelphia Not Hispanic 0.84 1.56 0.84 1.55
Philadelphia
Hispanic 0.94 1.27 0.94 1.14
New Castle Not Hispanic NA NA 3.85 3.92
Rest of New Castle
Hispanic NA NA 2.55 2.59
Not Hispanic NA NA 0.62 0.73
Wilmington
Hispanic NA NA 0.49 0.64
VII. Geographic Distribution of Mortgage Delinquency
Data from McDash Analytics, LLC, depicting the extent to which borrowers are current with
their mortgages, can be used to understand whether areas (not individuals) with varying
magnitudes of Hispanic household concentration experience greater or lesser levels of
mortgage delinquency. Data are presented for December 2008 and percentage changes are
based on a comparison of December 2008 to December 2007. Zip codes are categorized in
terms of the percent of the households in the zip code headed by a Hispanic householder; the
source of the data is the 2007 Claritas estimates. Median values are calculated for zip codes
less than 5% Hispanic; these values are not computed in areas more than 5% Hispanic
because of the small number of such areas.xviii
Berks County
In Berks County we observe that the median zip code percent non-current for prime loans in
areas with less than 5% of households headed by Hispanics is 5.35%. Areas with more
substantial Hispanic concentrations are all higher (ranging from 8.37% to 13.95%). The
median zip code experienced a 31.19% rise in the percent of prime loans in a non-current
status. Two of the four areas with Hispanic concentrations experienced greater increases; two
did not. It is important to note that although two areas experienced less substantial increases,
the rate nonetheless in these areas exceeded two-fold the average of the areas without a
substantial Hispanic concentration.
28
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Turning now to subprime mortgages, we observe that the median zip code percent non-
current is 33.69%; this average percentage is higher than all but one zip code with a substantial
(40%+) Hispanic concentration. The median percentage change for zip codes without
substantial concentrations is 35.35%; the same two areas that experienced greater rises in
prime non-currency also experienced greater increases in subprime non-currency.
Lancaster County
In Lancaster County, the median zip code with less than 5% Hispanic had a 4.68% non-
currency among prime loans and a 28.32% increase in the last year. All areas with substantial
concentrations of Hispanic householders experienced a higher prime percentage non-
currency, and one-of-three experienced a more substantial rise. That said, the two zip codes
that did not experience a substantial rise in the last year already had higher than average
percentages non-currency.
Within Lancaster County zip codes with less than 5% Hispanic, the median percent non-
current among subprime loans is 33.45%; all zip codes with more substantial Hispanic
concentrations were at or above this level. The growth in the percent non-current in zip codes
with more substantial Hispanic concentrations exceeded the median percent change among
areas with less than 5% Hispanic.
Lehigh County
Turning to Lehigh County, the median prime percent non-current among zip codes with less
than 5% Hispanic is 4.42%. Every zip code with more substantial percents Hispanic had
higher prime percents non-current. Moreover, four of the seven zip codes with higher
percentages Hispanic had greater percentage increases in non-currency, and of those that did
not, all three had percentages non-current well in excess of the median zip code of areas with
less than 5% Hispanic.
With respect to the subprime loans in Lehigh County we observe that the median zip code
subprime percent non-current for areas with less than 5% Hispanic is 32.80%; every zip code
with higher percentages Hispanic had non-currency percentages above this average. The
median increase in subprime percent non-current is 37.97%. Six of seven zip codes with more
substantial Hispanic percentages had rates of change in excess of that average.
Northampton County
In Northampton County, the median percent non-current among zip codes with less than 5%
Hispanic is 6.20%. Except for Philadelphia (8.84%), this is the highest median percent non-
current for prime loans among the study counties. All but one zip code with more substantial
percentages Hispanic had higher percentages non-current. The median percentage change
among areas with less than 5% Hispanic is 61.69%; this is greater than every zip code with
higher percentages Hispanic.
29
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Subprime non-currency in zip codes with less than 5% Hispanic averages 34.90%; all but one
zip code with higher percentages Hispanic exceeded that average. Moreover, the percentage
change in each zip code among these more heavily Hispanic areas exceeded the median
percentage change in areas with less than 5% Hispanic (221.30%).
Philadelphia County
Philadelphia zip codes with less than 5% Hispanic average 8.84% non-currency for prime
loans. Among the 12 zip codes with more than 5% Hispanic, eight of the 12 zip codes had
higher percentages non-currency. The median zip code percent non-current among subprime
loans is 36.46%; this is the highest median of all study areas. Among the 12 zip codes with
more than 5% Hispanic, 3 were higher. The median percentage change among zip codes with
less than 5% Hispanic is 23.47%; 5 zip codes with more than 5% Hispanic had higher
percentage changes.
New Castle County
Finally, in New Castle County, the median percentage non-current for prime loans among zip
codes with less than 5% Hispanic is 4.59% and the typical change is 47.28%. Among zip
codes with higher percentages Hispanic, all 4 had higher prime percentages non-current.
Among zip codes with less than 5% Hispanic, the median percent non-current for subprime
loans is 35% and the median percentage change is 49.79%. This percentage change is the
highest among all study counties, suggesting that the subprime lending problem has escalated
at a faster rate than in other areas. Among zip codes with higher percentages Hispanic, three
of four had higher percentages non-current for subprime loans; one of four zip codes had a
higher percentage change in non-current among subprime loans.
These zip code area data do not speak directly to the experience of Hispanic homeowners or
borrowers – like the HMDA, HEMAP or foreclosure filing data. Nevertheless they do speak
to the experience of homeowners living in areas with greater or lesser percentages Hispanic.
And these data show that as a group, areas with more substantial percentages Hispanic have
greater prime and subprime non-currency. The implication is that the markets in these areas
are more fragile, and thus, are likely to experience downturns in the real estate market more
adversely.
30
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 31: Prime and Subprime Mortgage Delinquency by Zip Code Percent Hispanic – Study
Counties
Berks County
Pct Change in Pct of Subprime Pct Change in
Number of Pct of Prime Loans Prime Pct Number of Loans in a Non- Subprime Pct
3-Digit Zip Prime Loans in in a Non-current Non-current, Subprime Loans current Status, Non-current,
Code Sample, 12/08 Status, 12/08 12/07-12/08 in Sample, 12/08 12/08 12/07-12/08 Percent Hispanic
180 36 5.71% 1 NA NA Under 5%
180 76 3.95% -46.71% 5 NA NA Under 5%
195 243 3.73% -19.54% 10 30.00% NA Under 5%
195 536 3.75% -10.63% 36 20.03% -5.56% Under 5%
195 444 4.77% -9.74% 19 46.32% -2.49% Under 5%
195 101 4.95% -6.93% 10 50.00% -10.00% Under 5%
195 978 4.21% -4.18% 78 37.66% 32.64% Under 5%
195 239 6.72% -2.61% 12 50.00% 40.62% Under 5%
195 910 5.20% -0.89% 65 25.40% 4.76% Under 5%
196 1,224 5.68% 1.37% 86 30.59% -4.16% Under 5%
195 183 8.24% 5.97% 16 43.75% 2.08% Under 5%
195 1,519 4.12% 6.49% 79 36.83% 55.82% Under 5%
195 824 3.44% 9.53% 26 46.15% 186.15% Under 5%
195 693 5.23% 12.18% 44 29.55% 83.84% Under 5%
196 2,289 5.15% 13.91% 189 33.69% 38.72% Under 5%
196 4,278 5.79% 21.58% 287 35.69% 38.06% Under 5%
195 161 6.37% 22.61% 9 NA NA Under 5%
196 2,444 5.17% 24.91% 160 40.25% 57.17% Under 5%
180 812 4.71% 31.19% 43 40.48% 69.26% Under 5%
195 2,043 5.69% 31.84% 108 32.71% 55.03% Under 5%
195 544 4.25% 33.04% 25 20.00% -22.50% Under 5%
195 1,853 6.53% 33.18% 125 36.00% 46.28% Under 5%
195 292 5.84% 36.16% 14 42.86% 54.29% Under 5%
196 3,048 4.39% 43.04% 147 25.69% 28.47% Under 5%
195 1,365 5.52% 48.78% 82 34.15% 32.32% Under 5%
196 1,678 3.55% 49.19% 67 28.79% 46.00% Under 5%
195 443 5.67% 51.64% 31 33.33% 14.81% Under 5%
195 802 8.20% 60.15% 93 37.63% 12.90% Under 5%
195 453 5.79% 62.50% 55 30.77% 25.13% Under 5%
195 1,793 5.83% 70.02% 80 26.25% 1.64% Under 5%
195 871 6.53% 74.10% 61 32.79% 38.33% Under 5%
195 855 5.43% 75.26% 30 27.59% 51.72% Under 5%
195 284 7.47% 76.24% 18 22.22% 40.74% Under 5%
195 555 4.37% 101.49% 22 45.00% 230.00% Under 5%
170 221 8.18% 118.95% 11 18.18% 9.09% Under 5%
195 1,095 5.26% 137.94% 70 33.82% 5.70% Under 5%
Median Zip 5.35% 31.19% 33.69% 35.35%
196 842 8.37% 32.52% 101 29.59% 51.82% 25-30% Hispanic
196 2,048 11.99% 18.57% 331 30.06% 28.05% 30-35% Hispanic
196 1,851 11.36% 19.95% 297 32.08% 24.43% 40%+ Hispanic
196 849 13.95% 36.43% 176 35.80% 82.05% 40%+ Hispanic
Key to Municipalities:
= Wilmington
= Reading
= Lancaster
= Allentown
= Bethlehem
= Easton
31
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Lancaster County
Pct Change in Pct of Subprime Pct Change in
Number of Pct of Prime Loans Prime Pct Number of Loans in a Non- Subprime Pct
3-Digit Zip Prime Loans in in a Non-current Non-current, Subprime Loans current Status, Non-current,
Code Sample, 12/08 Status, 12/08 12/07-12/08 in Sample, 12/08 12/08 12/07-12/08 Percent Hispanic
175 10 0.00% NA 1 NA NA Under 5%
175 140 3.60% -25.98% 12 16.67% -45.83% Under 5%
175 94 2.13% -8.51% 2 NA NA Under 5%
175 411 4.67% -8.27% 14 21.43% -14.29% Under 5%
175 109 2.78% -7.41% 4 NA NA Under 5%
175 561 3.97% -6.56% 31 33.45% 10.39% Under 5%
175 179 5.03% -2.79% 10 40.00% 20.00% Under 5%
175 231 8.70% 2.06% 19 38.89% -14.44% Under 5%
195 147 7.59% 6.97% 7 NA NA Under 5%
175 610 7.11% 8.07% 22 38.10% 65.08% Under 5%
175 4,794 3.06% 8.11% 203 30.69% 59.89% Under 5%
170 2,921 4.25% 8.55% 147 35.40% 51.46% Under 5%
175 283 4.69% 9.11% 16 26.67% -24.44% Under 5%
175 1,826 4.37% 12.72% 89 29.76% 21.34% Under 5%
175 470 3.22% 13.90% 25 32.00% 4.00% Under 5%
175 296 4.81% 16.27% 14 21.43% 242.86% Under 5%
175 769 3.29% 18.28% 39 20.51% -41.20% Under 5%
175 956 4.54% 21.34% 34 38.24% 48.69% Under 5%
175 799 4.41% 25.54% 47 48.94% 33.22% Under 5%
175 1,003 3.92% 25.93% 29 32.14% 17.86% Under 5%
175 285 4.63% 27.22% 14 50.00% 100.00% Under 5%
175 68 5.88% 29.41% 4 NA NA Under 5%
175 2,085 5.25% 33.01% 109 42.20% 15.10% Under 5%
175 434 6.32% 33.09% 15 33.33% 100.00% Under 5%
175 3,005 4.68% 35.60% 155 29.60% 3.43% Under 5%
176 6,169 3.48% 35.99% 223 30.91% 28.62% Under 5%
175 378 5.57% 36.66% 19 26.32% 10.53% Under 5%
175 683 4.14% 37.09% 21 33.33% 72.22% Under 5%
175 595 5.26% 37.56% 32 41.94% 88.71% Under 5%
175 292 6.19% 39.41% 20 47.37% -0.96% Under 5%
175 1,044 6.68% 42.45% 70 38.08% 52.41% Under 5%
175 802 3.14% 45.21% 29 34.48% 112.64% Under 5%
175 1,615 5.19% 45.75% 82 38.76% 53.32% Under 5%
175 179 3.35% 52.52% 10 10.00% -20.00% Under 5%
175 793 6.12% 54.08% 48 42.55% 64.54% Under 5%
175 319 4.78% 57.88% 14 42.86% 328.57% Under 5%
175 269 7.95% 92.36% 16 37.50% -15.62% Under 5%
175 46 4.45% 95.65% 3 NA NA Under 5%
175 121 10.92% 155.64% 7 NA NA Under 5%
175 110 7.27% 160.39% 5 NA NA Under 5%
175 218 10.14% 171.20% 15 33.33% -11.11% Under 5%
Median Zip 4.68% 28.32% 33.45% 21.34%
175 1,704 9.38% 42.10% 147 36.30% 23.11% 5-10% Hispanic
176 6,331 6.42% 13.56% 428 33.89% 39.33% 10-15% Hispanic
176 4,538 6.19% 4.06% 338 37.39% 34.52% 20-25% Hispanic
32
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Lehigh County
Pct Change in Pct of Subprime Pct Change in
Number of Pct of Prime Loans Prime Pct Number of Loans in a Non- Subprime Pct
3-Digit Zip Prime Loans in in a Non-current Non-current, Subprime Loans current Status, Non-current,
Code Sample, 12/08 Status, 12/08 12/07-12/08 in Sample, 12/08 12/08 12/07-12/08 Percent Hispanic
180 191 7.37% 4.86% 15 26.67% -13.33% Under 5%
180 988 7.50% 11.78% 113 36.95% 35.47% Under 5%
180 615 4.89% 13.15% 36 22.22% -1.23% Under 5%
180 946 8.97% 17.93% 114 35.71% 24.06% Under 5%
180 144 3.47% 28.47% 6 NA NA Under 5%
180 868 3.84% 32.00% 30 20.00% 28.00% Under 5%
180 754 3.88% 32.23% 35 28.57% 59.18% Under 5%
181 861 2.82% 38.96% 36 37.14% 133.47% Under 5%
180 1,387 3.85% 42.31% 58 30.36% 37.77% Under 5%
180 789 6.51% 52.30% 50 40.00% 38.82% Under 5%
180 982 3.79% 54.01% 47 28.26% 38.16% Under 5%
180 323 3.42% 54.83% 17 18.75% 18.75% Under 5%
180 485 3.95% 56.36% 16 50.00% 90.00% Under 5%
181 4,982 5.53% 58.12% 300 42.03% 58.63% Under 5%
180 1,905 5.34% 62.25% 109 44.95% 76.82% Under 5%
180 730 3.03% 70.39% 32 32.26% 11.44% Under 5%
180 3,501 4.92% 75.98% 141 33.34% 41.45% Under 5%
180 43 6.98% 241.86% 6 NA NA Under 5%
Median Zip 4.42% 47.30% 32.80% 37.97%
180 2,564 6.75% 43.33% 181 33.71% 38.27% 5-10% Hispanic
180 2,993 7.16% 25.38% 285 35.56% 38.04% 10-15% Hispanic
181 4,751 7.94% 47.15% 466 38.38% 32.39% 10-15% Hispanic
181 1,200 11.09% 61.42% 189 39.15% 52.85% 20-25% Hispanic
181 3,864 15.96% 63.83% 801 39.70% 42.52% 40%+ Hispanic
181 156 16.22% 66.19% 30 50.12% 94.23% 40%+ Hispanic
Northampton County
Pct Change in Pct of Subprime Pct Change in
Number of Pct of Prime Loans Prime Pct Number of Loans in a Non- Subprime Pct
3-Digit Zip Prime Loans in in a Non-current Non-current, Subprime Loans current Status, Non-current,
Code Sample, 12/08 Status, 12/08 12/07-12/08 in Sample, 12/08 12/08 12/07-12/08 Percent Hispanic
180 2,612 4.55% 32.96% 157 35.26% 15.64% Under 5%
180 689 6.02% 34.46% 69 47.06% 23.92% Under 5%
180 1,808 8.35% 39.44% 194 38.75% 14.53% Under 5%
180 2,122 5.71% 47.59% 169 38.32% 37.51% Under 5%
180 2,593 5.10% 49.04% 165 28.22% 18.67% Under 5%
180 3,693 5.64% 52.48% 252 38.10% 52.38% Under 5%
180 996 6.68% 57.46% 91 40.00% 36.92% Under 5%
180 1,490 6.20% 61.69% 112 33.05% 11.10% Under 5%
180 1,490 6.20% 61.69% 112 33.05% 11.10% Under 5%
183 493 8.17% 62.35% 44 46.52% 51.20% Under 5%
180 2,656 5.10% 65.05% 169 34.54% 52.84% Under 5%
180 290 10.03% 70.59% 17 29.41% 17.65% Under 5%
180 517 7.44% 76.35% 46 27.27% 6.61% Under 5%
180 767 7.07% 86.93% 64 28.13% 57.03% Under 5%
180 35 11.43% 105.71% 6 NA NA Under 5%
Median Zip 6.20% 61.69% 34.90% 21.30%
180 4,203 8.91% 42.85% 512 38.61% 41.67% 5-10% Hispanic
180 2,993 7.16% 25.38% 285 35.56% 38.04% 10-15% Hispanic
180 4,134 5.08% 41.98% 264 39.54% 54.92% 10-15% Hispanic
180 2,567 8.50% 44.51% 295 32.19% 22.88% 25-30% Hispanic
33
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Philadelphia County
Pct Change in Pct of Subprime Pct Change in
Number of Pct of Prime Loans Prime Pct Number of Loans in a Non- Subprime Pct
3-Digit Zip Prime Loans in in a Non-current Non-current, Subprime Loans current Status, Non-current,
Code Sample, 12/08 Status, 12/08 12/07-12/08 in Sample, 12/08 12/08 12/07-12/08 Percent Hispanic
191 4 NA NA NA NA NA NA
191 1,254 2.00% -24.67% 43 30.95% 133.56% Under 5%
191 435 2.08% -9.01% 12 16.67% 0.00% Under 5%
191 1,116 11.63% 4.00% 381 36.53% 9.60% Under 5%
191 729 10.61% 6.06% 92 48.35% 43.67% Under 5%
191 3,273 4.57% 10.59% 233 24.24% 32.07% Under 5%
191 869 18.27% 10.70% 437 38.11% 29.50% Under 5%
191 2,260 21.42% 10.79% 756 46.07% 14.45% Under 5%
191 2,913 14.23% 10.88% 751 41.04% 22.80% Under 5%
191 2,150 17.88% 12.42% 815 36.85% 15.59% Under 5%
191 1,601 16.83% 12.70% 631 36.38% 20.61% Under 5%
191 3,112 9.51% 13.99% 413 35.37% 24.62% Under 5%
191 830 15.53% 16.04% 255 36.76% 20.21% Under 5%
191 2,273 11.75% 17.30% 684 37.44% 16.38% Under 5%
191 2,267 13.68% 18.22% 654 33.49% 17.49% Under 5%
191 1,117 8.53% 21.43% 196 37.63% 44.52% Under 5%
191 3,337 8.12% 22.09% 374 39.19% 24.15% Under 5%
191 2,194 13.16% 22.86% 605 38.37% 20.48% Under 5%
191 2,831 6.91% 23.77% 368 35.81% 27.85% Under 5%
191 3,039 16.25% 25.51% 1,065 36.80% 9.74% Under 5%
191 4,685 3.72% 25.94% 257 32.94% 60.93% Under 5%
191 1,042 1.94% 26.94% 42 19.51% 1.90% Under 5%
191 1,668 17.01% 28.11% 638 36.98% 18.10% Under 5%
191 1,050 14.72% 31.97% 261 41.80% 36.88% Under 5%
191 3,578 9.15% 32.54% 620 38.95% 27.55% Under 5%
191 3,132 13.73% 33.16% 629 36.64% 15.72% Under 5%
191 4,636 4.29% 34.35% 277 31.99% 49.71% Under 5%
191 3,618 5.76% 37.84% 425 34.36% 16.46% Under 5%
191 4,299 7.90% 41.04% 565 34.40% 11.13% Under 5%
191 2,926 7.18% 43.15% 253 39.44% 39.33% Under 5%
191 1,176 4.03% 44.23% 96 30.53% 54.16% Under 5%
191 1,850 2.51% 48.51% 40 17.50% 42.92% Under 5%
191 941 3.20% 49.14% 38 21.05% 41.35% Under 5%
191 3,033 4.58% 51.04% 155 25.00% 61.54% Under 5%
191 2,158 1.91% 55.73% 47 4.26% 17.02% Under 5%
Median Zip 8.84% 23.32% 36.46% 23.47%
191 2,934 5.28% 22.10% 226 33.04% 57.56% 5-10% Hispanic
191 5,996 8.99% 32.07% 757 38.52% 19.48% 5-10% Hispanic
191 3,567 2.20% 33.84% 160 27.39% 42.58% 5-10% Hispanic
191 6,130 8.92% 44.20% 710 33.48% 17.00% 5-10% Hispanic
191 1,168 5.26% 22.59% 84 31.71% 14.15% 10-15% Hispanic
191 2,186 9.42% 46.41% 333 33.13% 11.13% 10-15% Hispanic
191 5,695 14.68% 21.38% 1,306 39.63% 29.00% 20-25% Hispanic
191 5,974 15.64% 21.52% 1,494 35.88% 16.31% 20-25% Hispanic
191 4,160 15.26% 12.64% 871 35.03% 18.09% 30-35% Hispanic
191 1,979 17.55% 15.76% 663 35.66% 11.94% 30-35% Hispanic
191 634 8.61% 4.55% 149 37.42% 28.87% 35-40% Hispanic
191 370 17.17% 40.12% 140 31.65% 35.66% 40%+ Hispanic
34
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
New Castle County
Pct Change in Pct of Subprime Pct Change in
Number of Pct of Prime Loans Prime Pct Number of Loans in a Non- Subprime Pct
3-Digit Zip Prime Loans in in a Non-current Non-current, Subprime Loans current Status, Non-current,
Code Sample, 12/08 Status, 12/08 12/07-12/08 in Sample, 12/08 12/08 12/07-12/08 Percent Hispanic
197 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA
198 898 0.90% 18.97% 33 9.09% 236.36% Under 5%
197 26 3.85% 19.23% NA NA NA Under 5%
198 5,261 3.43% 22.01% 241 26.36% 33.41% Under 5%
198 1,516 2.86% 35.54% 32 26.67% 55.56% Under 5%
198 3,097 2.70% 36.33% 82 28.40% 165.02% Under 5%
198 2,488 12.48% 38.77% 473 41.20% 27.67% Under 5%
197 1,409 7.49% 45.53% 162 35.00% 25.22% Under 5%
197 5,865 6.15% 46.59% 542 37.99% 35.11% Under 5%
197 3,346 7.05% 47.97% 320 36.10% 29.15% Under 5%
197 6,441 7.09% 50.19% 673 40.90% 42.45% Under 5%
197 6,118 2.97% 66.38% 250 26.53% 63.61% Under 5%
198 2,008 5.34% 70.17% 125 31.45% 49.10% Under 5%
197 1,396 8.24% 70.67% 121 47.11% 56.20% Under 5%
197 5,399 6.61% 73.67% 409 38.91% 49.79% Under 5%
198 3,378 2.68% 85.05% 141 27.34% 52.72% Under 5%
197 2,686 1.80% 174.47% 67 37.31% 74.13% Under 5%
Median Zip 4.59% 47.28% 35.00% 49.79%
197 6,902 11.07% 36.97% 1,077 39.20% 27.49% 5-10% Hispanic
198 2,126 6.97% 43.82% 185 34.62% 54.98% 5-10% Hispanic
198 1,019 14.89% 47.42% 220 42.40% 20.88% 5-10% Hispanic
198 4,383 9.31% 41.56% 576 36.04% 40.03% 15-20% Hispanic
Key to Municipalities:
= Wilmington
= Reading
= Lancaster
= Allentown
= Bethlehem
= Easton
VIII. Housing Counseling Agency Survey
TRF completed surveys with 39 housing counseling agencies in the study cities and counties.
Of those 39 agencies, 82% are HUD-certified and 72% are certified and receiving funds from
PHFA.
Of the 39 agencies, 29 (76%) report giving counseling in languages other than English;
Spanish is the most frequently cited language (92.9%) in addition to English. Among agencies
offering Spanish language counseling, 76.9% report that the counseling is both spoken and
written; 23.1% offer the counseling in Spanish only orally.
Of the agencies surveyed reporting that they provide Spanish language services, 69.6% report
no unique concerns presented by their Hispanic clients. Where concerns were mentioned, they
typically reported that those concerns were related to language barriers and the resultant ability
35
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
to understand the complex mortgage documents. Also mentioned was the perception that
counseling may either take too much time, cost money, or would be cause for embarrassment.
In terms of counseling volume, agencies range from small, very localized service providers up
through the larger, regional providers. The typical (i.e., median) agency serves 60 clients (total)
per month and nine Hispanic clients per month. Twenty-five percent of agencies serve 100 or
more clients per month; twenty-five percent of agencies surveyed report serving 25 or more
Latino clients.
More than half of the agencies surveyed report having at least one Spanish-speaking, full time
equivalent employee (FTE). In agencies that report offering services in Spanish, 36.1% of the
counselor FTEs are reported to be Spanish-speaking.
Agencies report that clients typically have to wait three days to receive counseling services.
One-quarter of agencies report one or fewer days wait; one quarter of agencies with Spanish
language capabilities report a wait of two or fewer days. Overall, there is no appreciable
difference reported for those seeking service in agencies that offer service in Spanish language.
Of the various services that agencies provide, the typical agency reports serving 20 clients per
month seeking foreclosure assistance. Those same agencies report seeing, typically, three
Latinos per month needing foreclosure assistance. As might be expected, of those agencies
that report offering counseling service in Spanish language, the number of Latino cases per
month is higher - five.
Notable is that there is an estimated 64% increase in the number of clients seeking foreclosure
assistance. Across all agencies, 95% report an increase in the number of clients seeking
foreclosure assistance since 2005, and 92% of agencies offering service in Spanish language
report an increase over the same time period.
36
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 33: Level of Service
Valid Number
Response of Agencies Median
Clients Served per Month 39 60
Latino Clients Served per Month 39 9
Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Employees 39 3
Spanish-speaking FTE Employees 39 1
Percent of FTE that Speak Spanish 39 20.0%
Percent of FTE that Speak Spanish* 26 36.1%
Number of Days Clients Wait for Service 37 3
Number of Days Clients Wait for Spanish-Speaking Service* 24 3
Number of Foreclosure Cases per Month 33 20
Number of Foreclosure Cases per Month for Latino Clients 34 3
Number of Foreclosure Cases per Month for Latino Clients* 21 5
Percent of Foreclosure Cases Filed by Latino Clients 33 10.0%
Percent of Foreclosure Cases Filed by Latino Clients* 20 18.3%
Additional Foreclosure Cases per Month Since 2005 29 13
Percent Increase in Foreclosure Cases per Month Since 2005 28 64.0%
* These figures only represent responses from Spanish-Speaking agencies
Agencies offer a variety of services. Figure 34 depicts the percent of agencies providing each
of those services. Firstly, the more typically provided services include: pre-purchase, post-
purchase and mortgage delinquency. The least frequently provided service is fair housing; only
approximately one-half of agencies provide this service. Secondly, there appears to be no
appreciable difference in the types of services offered by the agencies that offer general
services or services to Spanish-speaking clients.
Figure 34: Type of Service Provided
% Offering to % Offering
English to Spanish
Speaking Speaking
Service Clients Clients
Pre-purchase Counseling 96.2% 92.3%
Home Equity Conversion Mortgage Counseling 50.0% 46.2%
Renters Assistance 57.7% 53.8%
Homebuyer Education Programs 73.1% 73.1%
Predatory Lending 80.8% 76.9%
Fair Housing Assistance 53.8% 50.0%
Money Debt Management 76.9% 76.9%
Home Improvement and Rehabilitation Counseling 76.9% 76.9%
Postpurchase Counseling 96.2% 92.3%
Loan Modification 88.5% 84.6%
Loss mitigation 88.5% 84.6%
Mortgage delinquency and default resolution 96.2% 92.3%
Mobility and relocation counseling 57.7% 53.8%
37
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Agencies were asked to identify the three most frequently cited reasons for why clients face
foreclosure. Most (88.9%) agencies cite a change in the family’s situation related to a job loss
or an illness; that same reason is cited by agencies offering counseling in Spanish, 95.7% of the
time. Changes in monthly mortgage payments due to ARM adjustments is cited by almost six
of ten agencies. After that, there are a variety of presenting problems including issues related
to financial education, awareness of alternative products, predatory lending and the cost of
property taxes. Lastly, counseling agencies offering Spanish language services give a very
similar read of the causes of foreclosure for the clients they serve.
Figure 35: Most Frequently Cited Reasons for Foreclosure
Agencies with Spanish
All Agencies Speaking Services
Response N % of Cases N % of Cases
Predatory lending 5 13.9% 3 13.0%
Unaware of alternatives to high cost loans 7 19.4% 2 8.7%
Lack of financial educ on int rates, paying bills on time 8 22.2% 5 21.7%
Monthly payment rose - ARM 21 58.3% 15 65.2%
Original amount of monthly payment was unrealistic 4 11.1% 2 8.7%
Change in family’s financial situation due to job loss or illness 32 88.9% 22 95.7%
Homebuyer had very low equity at the time of home purchase 1 2.8% 1 4.3%
Loans exceed the value of the property 4 11.1% 3 13.0%
Multiple loans taken out for the purchase of the property 1 2.8% 0 0.0%
Cost of property taxes 5 13.9% 2 8.7%
Cost of maintaining property 1 2.8% 1 4.3%
Rising energy costs 3 8.3% 1 4.3%
Rising health care costs 1 2.8% 1 4.3%
In terms of outreach to the communities that these agencies serve, there are a variety of
methods frequently cited by all agencies, including agencies that offer services in Spanish.
Those services are community meetings, brochures/flyers, and the agency’s website. Beyond
those, church-related activities, referrals and mailings are oftentimes used to reach out to
clients. Television and radio were not as frequently used by the agencies we surveyed, most
likely due to the associated cost.
38
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Figure 36: Outreach Activities
Agencies with Spanish
All Agencies Speaking Services
Response N % of Cases N % of Cases
Church activities 4 19.0% 3 23.1%
Community meetings 15 71.4% 9 69.2%
Partner agency referrals 10 47.6% 6 46.2%
Brochure/flyer 16 76.2% 11 84.6%
Newspaper 7 33.3% 4 30.8%
Television 3 14.3% 3 23.1%
Radio 3 14.3% 2 15.4%
Mailing insert 4 19.0% 4 30.8%
Website 13 61.9% 8 61.5%
“Mystery Shopper” Survey Follow-up
To test the difference between access to service – described through the results of the distance
to counseling computations for owners in foreclosure and the housing counselor survey - and
the actuality of the service for people for whom Spanish is their primary language, we attempted
contact with 31 agencies using a “mystery
shopper” strategy.xix The results suggest that Mystery Shopper Scenario
although the data show that physical access to I am about three months late on my
housing counseling for Spanish speaking mortgage and I fear that I might lose my
owners is generally comparable to owners that home. My husband and I are still working –
speak English (except for Allentown/Lehigh, I work in an office and my husband is a
non-urban Lancaster and Northampton laborer - but we’re not getting as much
counties), the actuality of those services for money each month as we used to. My hours
people for whom Spanish is their primary (or are down, and my husband isn’t getting any
only) language is far less advantageous than the overtime. Together, we used to make about
data would suggest. Of the 31 agencies $40,000/year and our mortgage is
contacted by the mystery shopper, we observed $1,300/month. It was OK for us and our
the following: two children (4 and 6 years old) when I had
all the hours and my husband had the
• 13 offered services in Spanish (one of overtime, but now we cannot afford
the 13 offered it through an interpreter everything. Plus, we had a big expense when
that they would provide). our roof leaked and we had to get it fixed;
• Two agencies told the mystery shopper that used up all of our savings. Our credit
that they must bring their own card bills are not that high and we pay them
interpreter to the counseling session. regularly. But we’re in trouble with our
• Two of the five agencies contacted in mortgage and need help. I am very upset
Delaware were able to communicate about this; when I’m upset, my English is
with our mystery shopper in Spanish. not very good and I am more comfortable
• Three of the five agencies in Delaware talking in Spanish.
referred the mystery shopper to the
Delaware agency that had Spanish language capabilities.
39
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
• Of the 13 agencies that offered to work with our mystery shopper in Spanish, six are
agencies that are located in (and cater to) the Hispanic community in the City of
Philadelphia.
• In several instances, our mystery shopper was referred to the voicemail of a reputed
Spanish speaking staffmember in the agency – although not in all instances was the
recipient’s message in Spanish; the actuality of service in Spanish could therefore not
be confirmed.
• Of the ten agencies contacted outside of Philadelphia, three offered Spanish language
services.
• One of those ten agencies referred the mystery shopper to a different agency that they
represented that could provide counseling in Spanish language.
• For those that could provide counseling in Spanish language, waiting times ranged
from “walk-in” to 30 days; typically one to two weeks.
IX. Conclusion
By all accounts, the economy is going through one of its worst downturns in decades. At this
time, the recession we are experiencing is at least as long in duration as the recessions of 1975
and 1983; if it lasts much longer, this one will rival the recession of the 1930s. In such a
climate, few are spared.
This report examined how Hispanic homeowners in the FHLB and PHFA market areas have
been impacted by the downturn in the real estate and mortgage markets. Where possible,
comparisons were drawn between Hispanic, Black and White homeowners. The comparisons
suggest that Hispanic homeowners typically fare worse than White homeowners, but are more
or less equal to Black homeowners (depending upon the locale being evaluated); in some
locales, Black homeowners have been more adversely affected than Hispanics while in others,
Hispanics fared worse.
What we know is that Hispanics are affected by many of the same factors as homeowners of
other races and ethnicities: (1) expensive and “exotic” subprime loans; (2) a decline in the
value of homes; (3) layoffs and loss of income; (4) unexpected medical expenses; (5) marital
disruption; (6) loans that carried terms such as adjustable rates, balloons, and other
unsustainable features. We also know that the representation of Hispanics among those in
foreclosure in Berks, Lancaster, Lehigh, Northampton and Philadelphia counties exceeds their
representation among homeowners; in New Castle the representation is similar to what one
might expect. We also know that as the Hispanic population in these market areas tends to be
a residentially segregated population, the spatial clustering of mortgage foreclosures on homes
owned by Hispanics adversely affects not only those Hispanic households in foreclosure, but
also those (Hispanic and not Hispanic) who live in close proximity.
40
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Among the specific findings of this report are:
• The cities of Reading and Allentown have large and fast-growing Hispanic populations
– more than doubling since 1990. Philadelphia has the largest Hispanic population in
the study area, and it too is growing quickly, but not as quickly as the aforementioned
cities.
• As a percent of the population, Hispanics in Reading (50%), Allentown (35%) and
Lancaster City (32%) constitute the greatest concentrations in the study area.
• Owner-occupancy rates of Hispanics lag those of Whites in all parts of the study area.
In fact, there is no city or county in the study area where more than 50% of Hispanics
own their homes.
• Hispanic families and households have lower incomes than White and Black
families/households in all parts of the study area.
• Black and Hispanic unemployment rates, like those of Whites, have trended up
recently. In Pennsylvania, at the end of 2008, the Hispanic unemployment rate (13.8%)
vastly exceeded that of both Black (8.8%) and White (4.9%) labor force participants.
In Delaware, Hispanics (6.3%) fared better than Blacks but worse than Whites. In the
cities and counties of interest, Hispanic unemployment always exceeded that of
Whites, and depending upon the locale, was higher or lower than the unemployment
rate for Black labor force participants. Given what we know of employment as one of
the contemporary drivers of mortgage delinquency and default, this is a key indicator
to track.
• The likelihood that a Hispanic applicant for a purchase or refinance mortgage will be
denied invariably exceeds that of a White applicant and is typically about equal to (or
less than) that of a Black applicant. Hispanics are more likely than Whites and Blacks
to be seeking loans to purchase a home rather than refinance an existing mortgage.
• Hispanics are more highly leveraged than non-Hispanics. This is measured by the
larger loan amounts in relation to income levels. In a large percentage of cases, the
extent to which loans exceed a reasonable ratio of income is so great, it raises serious
concerns about short and long-term sustainability.
• Hispanics are invariably more likely to get higher-priced loans than Whites; Hispanics
are less (or about equally) likely to get those loans when compared to Black applicants.
• Applications to the HEMAP program have increased over time. The growth in the
number of Hispanic applicants is roughly comparable to the total application growth.
41
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
• There appears to be no pattern related to race/ethnicity as to whether Hispanics will
be approved for HEMAP assistance. Moreover, the approval rate of Hispanic
applicants seems to have grown at a faster rate over the last several years than it has
for White or Black applicants.
• Presented reasons for why HEMAP assistance is needed by Hispanics do not vary
dramatically from those presented by White or Black applicants. Typically, the loss of
a job (or income), medical expenses or marital disruption impact all applicants to the
HEMAP program in roughly equal proportions. There is, however, some variability by
locale.
• In each of our study counties except New Castle, the percent of owners that is
Hispanic is exceeded by the percent of foreclosures that we attribute to Hispanic
owners; in some instances those differences are great (e.g., Lehigh and Lancaster),
while in others, the differences are much less pronounced (Philadelphia).
• Like mortgage applications, the percent of Hispanics facing foreclosure for
delinquency on a purchase money mortgage is greater than it is for persons who are
not Hispanic. In some locales, these differences are moderating somewhat over time.
• Hispanics facing foreclosure are less likely to have conventional loans – meaning that a
larger percentage are facing foreclosure on a government insured (i.e., FHA or VA)
home mortgage. Over time, the difference between owners that are Hispanic and
those that are not is declining.
• ARMs and balloon loans are an increasing problem for Hispanic owners facing
foreclosure – as they are for owners who are not Hispanic. In some places though
(e.g., Philadelphia), the growth for Hispanics is dramatic.
• The spatial concentration of mortgage delinquency tends to be greater in areas
throughout the study cities and counties with larger Hispanic concentrations. The
pattern is however not invariant, meaning that there are areas with relatively small
Hispanic concentrations where delinquency is heavily concentrated. That said, as a
general statement, it is fair to say that Hispanic areas have higher (and growing) levels
of mortgage delinquency.
• Access to housing counseling in urban areas is greater than it is in suburban/rural
areas. In Lehigh, Lancaster and Northampton counties, this is particularly difficult –
especially for owners who need access to PHFA-approved HEMAP counselors that
can provide service in Spanish.
42
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
• Generally speaking, counseling agencies report a growth in the number of foreclosure
cases they are seeing over the last several years. Agencies that serve Spanish-speaking
clients generally do not report any substantial differences in the presenting problems
between their clients who are Hispanic and those who are not. These agencies report
offering a wide variety of counseling services – although few report being able to
provide assistance based on Fair Housing issues.
• As we observed with the HEMAP data, the issues of job loss/loss of income are
predominant among people seeking help from counselors for foreclosure. Counselors
do however report that ARM adjustments are a prevalent problem among clients.
• Following up on the counselor survey, TRF conducted a more limited mystery
shopper review of counseling services in order to learn what a Spanish-speaking
person facing foreclosure might experience when seeking counseling. The results
suggest that while counselors may technically offer services to a Spanish-speaking
population, in actuality, for those who speak only Spanish, accessing counseling is
difficult. Moreover, it appears that the wait for service is likely two to three times as
long if a client must (or prefers to) receive counseling in Spanish.
Recommendations:
HEMAP is a program with an enviable and nationally recognized track record. HEMAP
provides funding to thousands of Pennsylvanians each year – approximately 5% of whom are
Hispanic. The data suggest that there is likely room to enhance participation among Hispanic
owners facing foreclosure, and that can be done through vigorous and targeted outreach and
counseling agencies that can work effectively with Hispanic clients.
Allentown/Lehigh County stick out as places where the level of foreclosure impact on the
Hispanic owners is vastly greater than one might expect. This is likely related to the economic
factors of higher subprime borrowing rates, increased use of ARMs and other “exotic” loan
products, leverage ratios and elevated unemployment rates. It may also be related to the
relatively difficult access to counseling. And finally, this may be related to discrimination in the
lending process itself. We recommend a closer look at predatory/abusive lending practices,
especially those in which there is some connection to the ethnicity of the borrower. The US
Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has been active in this region; an affirmative
effort by the Department of Banking, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, HUD
and/or private fair housing organizations is warranted. Paired testing as a means of identifying
issues in the home buying process may be useful in ferreting out discriminatory processes that
adversely impact Hispanics.
There is a need for more and better counseling throughout the footprint. Acknowledging the
limitations of the mystery shopper effort, it did however highlight the difference between
what some agencies say they do and what they actually do – and that does not speak to how
well they deliver the services. We therefore propose a reexamination of training and a
43
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
upgraded monitoring effort of agencies especially as it relates to the quality and language
accessibility of their services. We also recommend advocating to HUD, on behalf of
Pennsylvanians and Delawareans, to examine those same counseling quality issues among the
HUD certified training agencies.
There is now a plethora of refinancing options for people; it is reminiscent of the years when
prescription drug coverage plans were changing and consumers were having significant
difficulty making informed decisions about their many options. It is vitally important that
people make good, informed decisions about their mortgage options. To do this, a ready,
willing and informed cadre of housing counselors – capable of providing assistance in multiple
languages – is critical. The data in this study (and other such studies) suggest that a significant
effort to create such a group (likely out of the existing agencies) to reach the homeowners in
the states of Pennsylvania and Delaware and help them make sound decisions could be quite
helpful.
As there will undoubtedly be people who lose their home through foreclosure, it is important
to recognize that starting anew as renters will not be easy. Firstly, in many markets, there is an
insufficiency of rental housing. Secondly, the people losing homes through foreclosure will
have damaged credit and likely inadequate savings for first and last month’s rent and/or
security deposits. Thirdly, the unit sizes that these families will need will undoubtedly be on
the larger side – a uniquely tight rental market. Lastly, studies show that Hispanics face high
levels of discrimination in seeking rental housing.xx Again, paired fair housing testing especially
in the Allentown/Lehigh County area might prove useful.
These things, taken together should prompt us to focus on ensuring that there is an ample
supply of accessible and affordable rental housing for those people losing their homes through
foreclosure. Both the FHLB and PHFA are active participants in the financing of this housing
stock; a review of priorities and allocation strategies for funding should be undertaken.
44
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Appendix 1:
American Housing Survey for the United States, 2007
Selected Comparative Ownership Financial Data for All, Black and Hispanic Households
Total Owner-Occupied Units
Monthly Housing Cost as a Percent of
Current Income Total Black Alone Hispanic
Less than 5 percent 3,557,000 265,000 229,000
5 to 9 percent 10,483,000 671,000 651,000
10 to 14 percent 11,471,000 858,000 723,000
15 to 19 percent 11,132,000 793,000 753,000
20 to 24 percent 9,312,000 716,000 684,000
25 to 29 percent 6,736,000 595,000 560,000
30 to 34 percent 4,822,000 405,000 506,000
35 to 39 percent 3,657,000 395,000 380,000
40 to 49 percent 4,294,000 510,000 501,000
50 to 59 percent 2,345,000 269,000 368,000
60 to 69 percent 1,421,000 155,000 235,000
70 to 99 percent 2,291,000 280,000 355,000
100 percent of more 3,376,000 439,000 353,000
Zero or negative income 750,000 114,000 67,000
Median (excl $0) 20% 23% 25%
Monthly Housing Cost as a Percent of
Current Income
Less than 5 percent 4.70% 4.10% 3.60%
5 to 9 percent 13.86% 10.38% 10.23%
10 to 14 percent 15.16% 13.27% 11.36%
15 to 19 percent 14.72% 12.27% 11.83%
20 to 24 percent 12.31% 11.08% 10.75%
25 to 29 percent 8.90% 9.20% 8.80%
30 to 34 percent 6.37% 6.26% 7.95%
35 to 39 percent 4.83% 6.11% 5.97%
40 to 49 percent 5.68% 7.89% 7.87%
50 to 59 percent 3.10% 4.16% 5.78%
60 to 69 percent 1.88% 2.40% 3.69%
70 to 99 percent 3.03% 4.33% 5.58%
100 percent of more 4.46% 6.79% 5.55%
Zero or negative income 0.99% 1.76% 1.05%
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Value of Home Total Black Alone Hispanic
Less than $10,000 1,988,000 184,000 229,000
$10,000 to $19,999 1,175,000 93,000 123,000
$20,000 to $29,999 1,088,000 168,000 96,000
$30,000 to $39,999 1,196,000 189,000 128,000
$40,000 to $59,999 3,111,000 336,000 285,000
$60,000 to $79,999 4,722,000 687,000 370,000
$80,000 to $99,999 5,499,000 666,000 420,000
$100,000 to $119,999 4,313,000 439,000 323,000
$120,000 to $149,999 6,735,000 636,000 435,000
$150,000 to $199,999 9,643,000 823,000 642,000
$200,000 to $299,999 13,132 931,000 1,035,000
$300,000 to $399,999 8,060,000 469,000 751,000
$400,000 to $499,999 4,740,000 281,000 530,000
$500,000 to $749,999 6,234,000 307,000 732,000
$750,000 or More 4,013,000 145,000 266,000
Median $191,471 $136,998 $212,657
Value of Home
Less than $10,000 3.18% 2.90% 3.60%
$10,000 to $19,999 1.88% 1.46% 1.93%
$20,000 to $29,999 1.74% 2.64% 1.51%
$30,000 to $39,999 1.91% 2.97% 2.01%
$40,000 to $59,999 4.98% 5.29% 4.48%
$60,000 to $79,999 7.55% 10.81% 5.81%
$80,000 to $99,999 8.79% 10.48% 6.60%
$100,000 to $119,999 6.90% 6.91% 5.07%
$120,000 to $149,999 10.77% 10.01% 6.83%
$150,000 to $199,999 15.42% 12.95% 10.09%
$200,000 to $299,999 0.02% 14.65% 16.26%
$300,000 to $399,999 12.89% 7.38% 11.80%
$400,000 to $499,999 7.58% 4.42% 8.33%
$500,000 to $749,999 9.97% 4.83% 11.50%
$750,000 or More 6.42% 2.28% 4.18%
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Year Unit Acquired Total Black Alone Hispanic
2005 to 2009 12,694,000 1,088,000 1,451,000
2000 to 2004 20,054,000 1,589,000 2,068,000
1995 to 1999 12,732,000 1,168,000 1,021,000
1990 to 1994 8,255,000 676,000 596,000
1985 to 1989 6,040,000 455,000 431,000
1980 to 1984 3,395,000 282,000 214,000
1975 to 1979 4,121,000 394,000 200,000
1970 to 1974 2,843,000 327,000 166,000
1960 to 1969 3,425,000 333,000 138,000
Before 1960 2,089,000 150,000 79,000
Median 1998 1998 2001
Year Unit Acquired
2005 to 2009 16.78% 16.84% 22.80%
2000 to 2004 26.51% 24.59% 32.50%
1995 to 1999 16.83% 18.07% 16.04%
1990 to 1994 10.91% 10.46% 9.37%
1985 to 1989 7.98% 7.04% 6.77%
1980 to 1984 4.49% 4.36% 3.36%
1975 to 1979 5.45% 6.10% 3.14%
1970 to 1974 3.76% 5.06% 2.61%
1960 to 1969 4.53% 5.15% 2.17%
Before 1960 2.76% 2.32% 1.24%
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Amount of Down Payment Total Black Alone Hispanic
No down payment 6,616,000 712,000 666,000
Less than 3% 4,700,000 529,000 604,000
3 to 5 percent 5,933,000 755,000 842,000
6 to 10 percent 8,545,000 860,000 954,000
11 to 15 percent 3,355,000 267,000 311,000
16 to 20 percent 6,881,000 295,000 472,000
21 to 40 percent 6,841,000 254,000 389,000
41 to 99 percent 3,904,000 102,000 187,000
Bought outright 5,668,000 212,000 298,000
Not reported 17,893,000 1,708,000 1,283,000
Amount of Down Payment (of Reported)
No down payment 12.62% 12.50% 14.10%
Less than 3% 8.96% 9.29% 12.79%
3 to 5 percent 11.31% 13.26% 17.83%
6 to 10 percent 16.29% 15.10% 20.20%
11 to 15 percent 6.40% 4.69% 6.58%
16 to 20 percent 13.12% 5.18% 9.99%
21 to 40 percent 13.04% 4.46% 8.24%
41 to 99 percent 7.44% 1.79% 3.96%
Bought outright 10.81% 3.72% 6.31%
Not reported 25.44% 30.00% 21.36%
Major Source of Down Payment Total Black Alone Hispanic
Sale of previous home 22,897,000 766,000 1,289,000
Savings or cash on hand 31,005,000 3,303,000 3,248,000
Sale of other investment 737,000 33,000 43,000
Borrowing, other than mtg 2,444,000 244,000 238,000
Inheritance or gift 1,375,000 86,000 87,000
Land used for financing 584,000 40,000 31,000
Other 3,060,000 308,000 256,000
No down payment 6,616,000 712,000 666,000
Not reported 1,617,000 203,000 147,000
Major Source of Down Payment
Sale of previous home 33.32% 13.95% 22.00%
Savings or cash on hand 45.12% 60.14% 55.45%
Sale of other investment 1.07% 0.60% 0.73%
Borrowing, other than mtg 3.56% 4.44% 4.06%
Inheritance or gift 2.00% 1.57% 1.49%
Land used for financing 0.85% 0.73% 0.53%
Other 4.45% 5.61% 4.37%
No down payment 9.63% 12.96% 11.37%
Not reported 2.30% 3.56% 2.45%
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Number of Mortgages on Property Total Black Alone Hispanic
1 32,963,000 3,172,000 3,201,000
2 11,741,000 684,000 994,000
3 or more 847,000 62,000 85,000
Number not reported 5,053,000 513,000 369,000
Number of Mortgages on Property
1 72.37% 80.96% 74.79%
2 25.78% 17.46% 23.22%
3 or more 1.86% 1.58% 1.99%
Number not reported 9.99% 11.58% 7.94%
Payment Plan of Primary Mortgage Total Black Alone Hispanic
Fixed pmt; self-amortizing 37,876,000 3,180,000 3,573,000
Adjustable rate mortgage 2,261,000 272,000 249,000
Adjustable term mortgage 53,000 3,000 10,000
Graduated payment mortgage 815,000 74,000 83,000
Balloon 382,000 27,000 37,000
Other 0 0 0
Combination 180,000 6,000 21,000
Not Reported 4,894,000 519,000 419,000
Payment Plan of Primary Mortgage
Fixed pmt; self-amortizing 91.12% 89.28% 89.93%
Adjustable rate mortgage 5.44% 7.64% 6.27%
Adjustable term mortgage 0.13% 0.08% 0.25%
Graduated payment mortgage 1.96% 2.08% 2.09%
Balloon 0.92% 0.76% 0.93%
Other 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Combination 0.43% 0.17% 0.53%
Not Reported 10.53% 12.72% 9.54%
Year Primary Mortgage Originated Total Black Alone Hispanic
2005 to 2009 16,054,000 1,360,000 1,743,000
2000 to 2004 17,994,000 1,246,000 1,580,000
1995 to 1999 6,063,000 709,000 547,000
1990 to 1994 2,958,000 320,000 266,000
1985 to 1989 1,633,000 169,000 129,000
1980 to 1984 626,000 94,000 58,000
1975 to 1979 630,000 94,000 29,000
1970 to 1974 321,000 68,000 21,000
Before 1970 182,000 22,000 21,000
Median 2003 2002 2004
Year Primary Mortgage Originated
2005 to 2009 34.55% 33.32% 39.67%
2000 to 2004 38.73% 30.52% 35.96%
1995 to 1999 13.05% 17.37% 12.45%
1990 to 1994 6.37% 7.84% 6.05%
1985 to 1989 3.51% 4.14% 2.94%
1980 to 1984 1.35% 2.30% 1.32%
1975 to 1979 1.36% 2.30% 0.66%
1970 to 1974 0.69% 1.67% 0.48%
Before 1970 0.39% 0.54% 0.48%
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Current Total Loan as Percent of Value Total Black Alone Hispanic
Less than 20 percent 7,204,000 770,000 623,000
20 to 39 percent 9,102,000 660,000 845,000
40 to 59 percent 9,626,000 730,000 862,000
60 to 79 percent 10,365,000 876,000 916,000
80 to 89 percent 4,489,000 466,000 505,000
90 to 99 percent 3,220,000 384,000 325,000
100 percent or more 2,456,000 196,000 316,000
Not reported
Median 54.4% 56.7% 56.7%
Current Total Loan as Percent of Value
Less than 20 percent 15.51% 18.86% 14.18%
20 to 39 percent 19.59% 16.17% 19.24%
40 to 59 percent 20.72% 17.88% 19.63%
60 to 79 percent 22.31% 21.46% 20.86%
80 to 89 percent 9.66% 11.42% 11.50%
90 to 99 percent 6.93% 9.41% 7.40%
100 percent or more 5.29% 4.80% 7.19%
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Appendix 2:
2007 Lender Market Share of Loan Originations
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 SOVEREIGN BANK 139 24.30 8,129 24.07 58
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 65 11.36 3,605 10.68 55
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 52 9.09 3,203 9.49 62
4 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 31 5.42 1,696 5.02 55
5 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 25 4.37 1,516 4.49 61 Reading Hispanic Purchase
6 HSBC MORTGAGE CORP 24 4.20 1,614 4.78 67
7 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 23 4.02 1,071 3.17 47
8 ABN AMRO MTG GROUP INC 15 2.62 981 2.91 65
9 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 15 2.62 914 2.71 61
10 LEESPORT BANK 11 1.92 554 1.64 50
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 SOVEREIGN BANK 57 12.53 4,444 12.83 78
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 39 8.57 3,531 10.19 91
3 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 38 8.35 3,263 9.42 86
4 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 37 8.13 2,571 7.42 69 Reading Not Hispanic Purchase
5 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 26 5.71 1,964 5.67 76
6 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 22 4.84 1,258 3.63 57
7 CITIMORTGAGE, INC 15 3.30 1,266 3.65 84
8 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 13 2.86 1,126 3.25 87
9 HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL LLC 11 2.42 972 2.81 88
10 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 11 2.42 942 2.72 86
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 33 13.04 1,582 10.80 48
2 CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA 25 9.88 1,270 8.67 51
3 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 19 7.51 1,184 8.08 62
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 17 6.72 1,032 7.04 61
5 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 12 4.74 903 6.16 75 Reading Hispanic Refinance
6 EQUIFIRST CORPORATION 8 3.16 600 4.10 75
7 RBS CITIZENS BANK, N.A. 8 3.16 372 2.54 47
8 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 8 3.16 341 2.33 43
9 CITIFINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 7 2.77 340 2.32 49
10 FULTON BANK 6 2.37 314 2.14 52
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 55 13.38 3,020 11.57 55
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 20 4.87 1,253 4.80 63
3 SOVEREIGN BANK 19 4.62 1,105 4.23 58
4 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK 17 4.14 944 3.62 56 Reading Not Hispanic Refinance
5 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 15 3.65 1,444 5.53 96
6 CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA 14 3.41 682 2.61 49
7 WELLS FARGO FIN\'L PENNSYLVANIA 13 3.16 1,161 4.45 89
8 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 13 3.16 807 3.09 62
9 CITIFINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 12 2.92 599 2.29 50
10 EQUIFIRST CORPORATION 9 2.19 755 2.89 84
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 SOVEREIGN BANK 164 19.45 11,336 15.67 69
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 92 10.91 7,543 10.43 82
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 78 9.25 6,658 9.21 85
4 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 55 6.52 5,186 7.17 94
5 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 48 5.69 5,130 7.09 107 Berks Hispanic Purchase
6 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 36 4.27 2,867 3.96 80
7 HSBC MORTGAGE CORP 29 3.44 2,304 3.19 79
8 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 23 2.73 2,095 2.90 91
9 ABN AMRO MTG GROUP INC 22 2.61 1,654 2.29 75
10 EQUIFIRST CORPORATION 20 2.37 1,538 2.13 77
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 649 12.77 85,210 11.67 131
2 SOVEREIGN BANK 477 9.38 67,784 9.28 142
3 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 362 7.12 63,888 8.75 176
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 331 6.51 51,104 7.00 154 Berks Not Hispanic Purchase
5 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 291 5.72 39,657 5.43 136
6 FULTON BANK 177 3.48 26,131 3.58 148
7 AMTRUST BANK 168 3.31 28,565 3.91 170
8 LEESPORT BANK 157 3.09 18,607 2.55 119
9 ABN AMRO MTG GROUP INC 135 2.66 18,259 2.50 135
10 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 112 2.20 19,665 2.69 176
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 60 14.74 4,026 11.75 67
2 CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA 30 7.37 1,574 4.59 52
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 24 5.90 2,507 7.32 104
4 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 24 5.90 1,826 5.33 76
5 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 21 5.16 2,211 6.45 105 Berks Hispanic Refinance
6 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 21 5.16 1,518 4.43 72
7 EQUIFIRST CORPORATION 10 2.46 793 2.31 79
8 CITIMORTGAGE, INC 9 2.21 1,045 3.05 116
9 CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, NA 9 2.21 755 2.20 84
10 RBS CITIZENS BANK, N.A. 9 2.21 629 1.84 70
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 591 10.53 55,603 8.10 94
2 SOVEREIGN BANK 355 6.32 43,212 6.29 122
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 227 4.04 31,836 4.64 140
4 LEESPORT BANK 220 3.92 21,232 3.09 97 Berks Not Hispanic Refinance
5 NATIONAL PENN BANK 207 3.69 18,723 2.73 90
6 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 205 3.65 30,785 4.48 150
7 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 166 2.96 26,350 3.84 159
8 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 158 2.81 23,030 3.35 146
9 QUICKEN LOANS 154 2.74 23,115 3.37 150
10 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 136 2.42 21,761 3.17 160
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 169 20.10 19,279 20.44 114
2 MORTGAGEIT 108 12.84 14,178 15.03 131
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 83 9.87 7,544 8.00 91
4 HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL LLC 48 5.71 4,984 5.28 104
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 45 5.35 4,424 4.69 98 Allentown Hispanic Purchase
6 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 42 4.99 5,009 5.31 119
7 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 27 3.21 2,622 2.78 97
8 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 21 2.50 2,086 2.21 99
9 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 19 2.26 2,109 2.24 111
10 FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORP. 19 2.26 1,803 1.91 95
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 86 9.19 9,290 8.05 108
2 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 75 8.01 7,268 6.30 97
3 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 70 7.48 10,590 9.18 151
4 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 44 4.70 5,913 5.12 134
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 39 4.17 4,802 4.16 123 Allentown Not Hispanic Purchase
6 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 35 3.74 4,355 3.77 124
7 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 32 3.42 4,868 4.22 152
8 MORTGAGEIT 31 3.31 3,098 2.68 100
9 NATIONAL CITY BANK 29 3.10 3,877 3.36 134
10 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 22 2.35 2,771 2.40 126
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 70 14.00 5,802 11.74 83
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 53 10.60 5,430 10.98 102
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 47 9.40 5,453 11.03 116
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 30 6.00 3,332 6.74 111
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 19 3.80 1,476 2.99 78 Allentown Hispanic Refinance
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 13 2.60 497 1.01 38
7 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 11 2.20 972 1.97 88
8 PEOPLE FIRST FCU 11 2.20 418 0.85 38
9 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 10 2.00 1,184 2.39 118
10 MORTGAGEIT 10 2.00 1,060 2.14 106
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 208 17.84 15,175 13.30 73
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 62 5.32 6,942 6.08 112
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 61 5.23 6,451 5.65 106
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 52 4.46 5,804 5.09 112
5 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 44 3.77 3,166 2.78 72 Allentown Not Hispanic Refinance
6 FIRST COMMONWEALTH FCU 33 2.83 2,014 1.77 61
7 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 25 2.14 2,619 2.30 105
8 PEOPLE FIRST FCU 25 2.14 1,050 0.92 42
9 ALLENTOWN FEDERAL CREDIT UNION 23 1.97 1,777 1.56 77
10 CITIMORTGAGE, INC 21 1.80 1,924 1.69 92
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 196 18.08 24,165 17.66 123
2 MORTGAGEIT 119 10.98 16,362 11.96 137
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 107 9.87 10,499 7.67 98
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 66 6.09 9,777 7.14 148
5 HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL LLC 53 4.89 5,725 4.18 108 Lehigh Hispanic Purchase
6 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 53 4.89 5,633 4.12 106
7 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 39 3.60 4,250 3.11 109
8 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 27 2.49 3,450 2.52 128
9 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 23 2.12 2,331 1.70 101
10 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 21 1.94 2,928 2.14 139
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 463 10.89 90,337 12.41 195
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 293 6.89 47,482 6.52 162
3 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 251 5.90 42,626 5.85 170
4 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 210 4.94 28,462 3.91 136
5 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 150 3.53 27,069 3.72 180 Lehigh Not Hispanic Purchase
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 136 3.20 30,402 4.18 224
7 PULTE MORTGAGE LLC 115 2.70 23,522 3.23 205
8 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 115 2.70 18,503 2.54 161
9 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 114 2.68 20,239 2.78 178
10 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 112 2.63 18,289 2.51 163
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 86 13.44 7,533 10.63 88
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 63 9.84 7,416 10.46 118
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 53 8.28 6,463 9.12 122
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 37 5.78 4,616 6.51 125
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 25 3.91 2,249 3.17 90 Lehigh Hispanic Refinance
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 17 2.66 921 1.30 54
7 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 14 2.19 1,442 2.03 103
8 MORTGAGEIT 13 2.03 1,616 2.28 124
9 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 12 1.88 1,625 2.29 135
10 PEOPLE FIRST FCU 12 1.88 468 0.66 39
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 807 16.22 77,695 11.88 96
2 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 254 5.11 38,743 5.92 153
3 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 214 4.30 17,869 2.73 84
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 211 4.24 33,544 5.13 159
5 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 203 4.08 31,557 4.83 155 Lehigh Not Hispanic Refinance
6 FIRST COMMONWEALTH FCU 145 2.91 9,578 1.46 66
7 HARLEYSVILLE NATIONAL BANK 127 2.55 13,265 2.03 104
8 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 124 2.49 20,678 3.16 167
9 PEOPLE FIRST FCU 112 2.25 4,925 0.75 44
10 QUICKEN LOANS 110 2.21 18,873 2.89 172
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 26 17.93 3,602 19.62 139
2 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 16 11.03 1,748 9.52 109
3 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 11 7.59 1,478 8.05 134
4 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 10 6.90 869 4.73 87
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 9 6.21 935 5.09 104 Bethlehem Hispanic Purchase
6 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 7 4.83 877 4.78 125
7 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 6 4.14 915 4.98 153
8 MORTGAGEIT 6 4.14 493 2.69 82
9 HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL LLC 4 2.76 610 3.32 153
10 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 4 2.76 544 2.96 136
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 69 9.65 11,647 11.12 169
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 57 7.97 8,124 7.75 143
3 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 40 5.59 6,527 6.23 163
4 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 38 5.31 5,438 5.19 143
5 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 34 4.76 3,901 3.72 115 Bethlehem Not Hispanic Purchase
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 33 4.62 4,484 4.28 136
7 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 29 4.06 3,898 3.72 134
8 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 26 3.64 3,584 3.42 138
9 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 22 3.08 2,756 2.63 125
10 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 21 2.94 3,611 3.45 172
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 23 15.23 1,811 11.20 79
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 11 7.28 1,412 8.73 128
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 10 6.62 1,233 7.63 123
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 7 4.64 837 5.18 120
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 6 3.97 595 3.68 99 Bethlehem Hispanic Refinance
6 OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORP 5 3.31 476 2.94 95
7 WORLD SAVINGS BANK, FSB 5 3.31 471 2.91 94
8 QUICKEN LOANS 4 2.65 554 3.43 139
9 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 4 2.65 435 2.69 109
10 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 4 2.65 317 1.96 79
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 100 11.71 8,980 8.76 90
2 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 56 6.56 4,418 4.31 79
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 49 5.74 6,665 6.50 136
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 43 5.04 6,184 6.03 144
5 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 40 4.68 5,620 5.48 141 Bethlehem Not Hispanic Refinance
6 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 29 3.40 2,775 2.71 96
7 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 27 3.16 3,761 3.67 139
8 NATIONAL CITY BANK 20 2.34 2,786 2.72 139
9 QUICKEN LOANS 18 2.11 2,768 2.70 154
10 FIRST COMMONWEALTH FCU 18 2.11 1,028 1.00 57
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 45 11.08 6,134 9.35 136
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 40 9.85 7,706 11.75 193
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 30 7.39 3,773 5.75 126
4 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 25 6.16 3,550 5.41 142
5 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 20 4.93 2,929 4.47 146 Northampton Hispanic Purchase
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 13 3.20 1,191 1.82 92
7 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 12 2.96 2,102 3.20 175
8 MORTGAGEIT 12 2.96 1,393 2.12 116
9 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 11 2.71 1,710 2.61 155
10 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 10 2.46 1,910 2.91 191
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 461 11.84 90,265 12.94 196
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 273 7.01 50,887 7.30 186
3 MORTGAGE AMERICA, INC. 232 5.96 37,043 5.31 160
4 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 203 5.22 30,719 4.40 151
5 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 192 4.93 31,188 4.47 162 Northampton Not Hispanic Purchase
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 189 4.86 40,420 5.80 214
7 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 137 3.52 24,246 3.48 177
8 LAFAYETTE AMBASSADOR BANK 124 3.19 22,470 3.22 181
9 NATIONAL CITY BANK 107 2.75 17,911 2.57 167
10 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 106 2.72 19,529 2.80 184
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 34 10.93 2,768 6.40 81
2 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 27 8.68 4,042 9.35 150
3 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 19 6.11 3,233 7.48 170
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 18 5.79 2,644 6.11 147
5 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 12 3.86 1,771 4.09 148 Northampton Hispanic Refinance
6 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 12 3.86 1,116 2.58 93
7 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 11 3.54 1,659 3.84 151
8 LAFAYETTE AMBASSADOR BANK 9 2.89 546 1.26 61
9 MORTGAGEIT 7 2.25 1,254 2.90 179
10 NATIONAL CITY BANK 7 2.25 1,192 2.76 170
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 481 10.04 48,853 7.21 102
2 KEYSTONE NAZARETH BANK & TRUST 368 7.68 28,749 4.25 78
3 LAFAYETTE AMBASSADOR BANK 251 5.24 23,662 3.49 94
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 222 4.64 39,156 5.78 176
5 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 211 4.41 35,099 5.18 166 Northampton Not Hispanic Refinance
6 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 187 3.90 32,891 4.86 176
7 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 145 3.03 24,147 3.57 167
8 QUICKEN LOANS 130 2.71 23,000 3.40 177
9 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 116 2.42 16,169 2.39 139
10 FIRST COMMONWEALTH FCU 107 2.23 7,052 1.04 66
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 GATEWAY FUNDING DMS, L.P. 35 15.35 3,010 16.09 86
2 SOVEREIGN BANK 26 11.40 2,151 11.50 83
3 US BANK, N.A. 20 8.77 1,731 9.25 87
4 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 15 6.58 1,351 7.22 90
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 15 6.58 1,147 6.13 76 Lancaster City Hispanic Purchase
6 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 14 6.14 1,277 6.83 91
7 BLC BANK NA 13 5.70 668 3.57 51
8 HSBC MORTGAGE CORP 9 3.95 750 4.01 83
9 FULTON BANK 9 3.95 666 3.56 74
10 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 9 3.95 634 3.39 70
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 79 7.80 9,171 8.05 116
2 SOVEREIGN BANK 61 6.02 6,374 5.60 104
3 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 58 5.73 6,572 5.77 113
4 FULTON BANK 57 5.63 6,017 5.28 106
5 ARLINGTON CAPITAL MORTGAGE 52 5.13 5,691 5.00 109 Lancaster City Not Hispanic Purchase
6 AMTRUST BANK 44 4.34 6,399 5.62 145
7 BLC BANK NA 42 4.15 3,808 3.34 91
8 GATEWAY FUNDING DMS, L.P. 40 3.95 4,158 3.65 104
9 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 34 3.36 3,984 3.50 117
10 MARKET STREET MORTGAGE CORP 30 2.96 3,626 3.18 121
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 11 10.78 525 6.79 48
2 FULTON BANK 10 9.80 528 6.83 53
3 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 7 6.86 489 6.33 70
4 SOVEREIGN BANK 7 6.86 397 5.14 57
5 BLC BANK NA 4 3.92 319 4.13 80 Lancaster City Hispanic Refinance
6 EQUIFIRST CORPORATION 3 2.94 302 3.91 101
7 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 3 2.94 226 2.92 75
8 CITIFINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 3 2.94 212 2.74 71
9 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 3 2.94 199 2.57 66
10 GMAC MORTGAGE LLC 2 1.96 235 3.04 118
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 73 10.83 5,475 8.07 75
2 BLC BANK NA 47 6.97 3,872 5.71 82
3 FULTON BANK 45 6.68 4,484 6.61 100
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 26 3.86 3,272 4.82 126
5 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 26 3.86 2,990 4.41 115 Lancaster City Not Hispanic Refinance
6 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 22 3.26 3,474 5.12 158
7 SOVEREIGN BANK 21 3.12 1,612 2.38 77
8 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 19 2.82 1,980 2.92 104
9 BELCO COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION 14 2.08 485 0.71 35
10 AMERICAN HOME BANK, N.A. 13 1.93 1,617 2.38 124
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 GATEWAY FUNDING DMS, L.P. 51 11.81 5,241 10.77 103
2 SOVEREIGN BANK 37 8.56 3,540 7.27 96
3 US BANK, N.A. 30 6.94 3,239 6.66 108
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 29 6.71 3,468 7.13 120
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 26 6.02 2,809 5.77 108 Lancaster County Hispanic Purchase
6 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 21 4.86 2,448 5.03 117
7 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 19 4.40 1,942 3.99 102
8 AMTRUST BANK 16 3.70 2,103 4.32 131
9 BLC BANK NA 16 3.70 882 1.81 55
10 FULTON BANK 14 3.24 1,049 2.16 75
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 605 9.20 92,733 9.34 153
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 438 6.66 72,330 7.28 165
3 FULTON BANK 362 5.50 53,426 5.38 148
4 AMTRUST BANK 286 4.35 45,862 4.62 160
5 SOVEREIGN BANK 284 4.32 40,588 4.09 143 Lancaster County Not Hispanic Purchase
6 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 279 4.24 47,228 4.76 169
7 AMERICAN HOME BANK, N.A. 268 4.07 50,820 5.12 190
8 ARLINGTON CAPITAL MORTGAGE 247 3.75 40,199 4.05 163
9 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 205 3.12 27,617 2.78 135
10 BLC BANK NA 195 2.96 27,343 2.75 140
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 22 9.44 1,425 6.14 65
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 18 7.73 2,130 9.18 118
3 FULTON BANK 17 7.30 976 4.21 57
4 SOVEREIGN BANK 13 5.58 1,080 4.66 83
5 BLC BANK NA 9 3.86 735 3.17 82 Lancaster County Hispanic Refinance
6 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 8 3.43 907 3.91 113
7 QUICKEN LOANS 7 3.00 1,126 4.85 161
8 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 7 3.00 902 3.89 129
9 NATIONAL CITY BANK 5 2.15 656 2.83 131
10 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 5 2.15 482 2.08 96
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 454 7.17 42,489 5.46 94
2 FULTON BANK 416 6.57 43,367 5.57 104
3 BLC BANK NA 362 5.72 37,538 4.82 104
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 267 4.22 41,614 5.35 156
5 SOVEREIGN BANK 222 3.51 21,975 2.82 99 Lancaster County Not Hispanic Refinance
6 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 210 3.32 29,881 3.84 142
7 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 202 3.19 31,151 4.00 154
8 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 186 2.94 28,040 3.60 151
9 SUSQUEHANNA BANK PA 176 2.78 12,598 1.62 72
10 UNION NATIONAL COMMUNITY BANK 163 2.57 11,681 1.50 72
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 184 11.17 18,535 10.28 101
2 SOVEREIGN BANK 180 10.92 16,307 9.04 91
3 HUNTINGDON VALLEY BANK 131 7.95 12,297 6.82 94
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 117 7.10 11,846 6.57 101
5 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 111 6.74 13,861 7.68 125 Philadelphia Hispanic Purchase
6 FLAGSTAR BANK 63 3.82 5,080 2.82 81
7 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 55 3.34 5,988 3.32 109
8 AAKO INC 45 2.73 5,543 3.07 123
9 RBS CITIZENS BANK, N.A. 38 2.31 3,173 1.76 84
10 NATIONAL CITY BANK 37 2.25 3,748 2.08 101
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 1,349 8.77 229,617 9.53 170
2 TRIDENT MORTGAGE COMPANY 1,014 6.59 216,617 8.99 214
3 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 832 5.41 111,236 4.62 134
4 SOVEREIGN BANK 741 4.81 102,073 4.24 138
5 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 709 4.61 108,551 4.50 153 Philadelphia Not Hispanic Purchase
6 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 619 4.02 82,693 3.43 134
7 WACHOVIA MORTAGE 462 3.00 76,422 3.17 165
8 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 353 2.29 59,908 2.49 170
9 NATIONAL CITY BANK 343 2.23 43,620 1.81 127
10 GMAC MORTGAGE LLC 336 2.18 55,440 2.30 165
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 216 18.18 14,969 13.02 69
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 64 5.39 6,913 6.01 108
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 56 4.71 5,745 5.00 103
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 55 4.63 5,264 4.58 96
5 CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, NA 43 3.62 3,641 3.17 85 Philadelphia Hispanic Refinance
6 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 37 3.11 3,586 3.12 97
7 POLICE AND FIRE FEDERAL CU 32 2.69 1,717 1.49 54
8 CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA 31 2.61 2,428 2.11 78
9 QUICKEN LOANS 30 2.53 4,130 3.59 138
10 TAYLOR, BEAN & WHITAKER 23 1.94 3,648 3.17 159
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WACHOVIA BANK NA 1,382 9.36 117,936 6.58 85
2 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 833 5.64 110,559 6.17 133
3 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 804 5.45 105,189 5.87 131
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 678 4.59 95,666 5.34 141
5 POLICE AND FIRE FEDERAL CU 514 3.48 30,765 1.72 60 Philadelphia Not Hispanic Refinance
6 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK 378 2.56 54,940 3.06 145
7 CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA 356 2.41 25,339 1.41 71
8 CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, NA 311 2.11 31,798 1.77 102
9 WORLD SAVINGS BANK, FSB 302 2.05 47,829 2.67 158
10 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 292 1.98 42,174 2.35 144
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 14 17.50 1,670 15.75 119
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 9 11.25 1,470 13.87 163
3 GILPIN FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC 7 8.75 1,437 13.56 205
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 7 8.75 699 6.59 100
5 TRIDENT MORTGAGE COMPANY 6 7.50 712 6.72 119 Wilmington Hispanic Purchase
6 GMAC MORTGAGE LLC 4 5.00 503 4.74 126
7 FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORP. 3 3.75 575 5.42 192
8 GMAC BANK 2 2.50 423 3.99 212
9 TAYLOR, BEAN & WHITAKER 2 2.50 401 3.78 201
10 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 2 2.50 397 3.74 199
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 131 11.96 24,757 14.54 189
2 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 120 10.96 17,470 10.26 146
3 GILPIN FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC 85 7.76 16,778 9.86 197
4 TRIDENT MORTGAGE COMPANY 70 6.39 10,631 6.24 152
5 WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY 50 4.57 9,044 5.31 181 Wilmington Not Hispanic Purchase
6 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 41 3.74 7,347 4.32 179
7 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 40 3.65 5,024 2.95 126
8 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 31 2.83 4,706 2.76 152
9 RBS CITIZENS BANK, N.A. 30 2.74 3,654 2.15 122
10 WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES 26 2.37 4,784 2.81 184
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 CITICORP TRUST BANK, FSB 3 5.17 415 6.15 138
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 3 5.17 411 6.09 137
3 INDYMAC BANK, F.S.B. 3 5.17 410 6.07 137
4 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 3 5.17 362 5.36 121
5 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 3 5.17 304 4.50 101 Wilmington Hispanic Refinance
6 CITIFINANCIAL, INC. 3 5.17 244 3.61 81
7 WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIET 3 5.17 151 2.24 50
8 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK 2 3.45 378 5.60 189
8 ING BANK, FSB 2 3.45 378 5.60 189
9 TAYLOR, BEAN & WHITAKER 2 3.45 295 4.37 148
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 54 6.23 7,224 6.14 134
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 45 5.19 8,415 7.15 187
3 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 38 4.38 5,834 4.96 154
4 WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIET 37 4.27 3,854 3.28 104
5 QUICKEN LOANS 36 4.15 5,537 4.71 154 Wilmington Not Hispanic Refinance
6 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 25 2.88 2,855 2.43 114
7 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 23 2.65 3,390 2.88 147
8 WACHOVIA BANK OF DELAWARE 23 2.65 1,775 1.51 77
9 WELLS FARGO FIN\'L DELAWARE,INC 22 2.54 2,745 2.33 125
10 INDYMAC BANK, F.S.B. 22 2.54 2,391 2.03 109
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 79 15.80 13,581 15.95 172
2 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 55 11.00 11,122 13.06 202
3 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 37 7.40 6,414 7.53 173
4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 33 6.60 5,378 6.31 163
5 TRIDENT MORTGAGE COMPANY 26 5.20 3,813 4.48 147 New Castle, DE Hispanic Purchase
6 GILPIN FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC 25 5.00 4,793 5.63 192
7 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 25 5.00 3,238 3.80 130
8 FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORP. 12 2.40 2,346 2.75 196
9 TAYLOR, BEAN & WHITAKER 12 2.40 1,936 2.27 161
10 SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC 12 2.40 1,719 2.02 143
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 1,066 13.96 244,150 15.58 229
2 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 793 10.39 168,217 10.73 212
3 GILPIN FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC 575 7.53 121,063 7.72 211
4 TRIDENT MORTGAGE COMPANY 442 5.79 82,038 5.23 186
5 WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY 347 4.54 69,370 4.43 200 New Castle, DE Not Hispanic Purchase
6 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 274 3.59 51,921 3.31 189
7 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 226 2.96 45,920 2.93 203
8 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 217 2.84 43,270 2.76 199
9 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 209 2.74 36,701 2.34 176
10 GMAC MORTGAGE LLC 194 2.54 39,191 2.50 202
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 27 7.24 4,551 7.55 169
2 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 27 7.24 4,265 7.08 158
3 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 23 6.17 3,770 6.26 164
4 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 19 5.09 3,258 5.41 171
5 WACHOVIA BANK OF DELAWARE 18 4.83 1,870 3.10 104 New Castle, DE Hispanic Refinance
6 QUICKEN LOANS 17 4.56 3,052 5.06 180
7 CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, NA 11 2.95 1,976 3.28 180
8 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 10 2.68 1,080 1.79 108
9 WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIET 10 2.68 711 1.18 71
10 CITICORP TRUST BANK, FSB 8 2.14 1,297 2.15 162
Total Average
Dollar Loan
Market Amount Market Size
Rank Institution Name Count Share % ($000's) Share % ($000's)
1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 492 6.03 105,612 7.53 215
2 COUNTRYWIDE BANK, FSB 429 5.26 78,665 5.61 183
3 WACHOVIA BANK OF DELAWARE 392 4.81 36,712 2.62 94
4 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK 386 4.73 73,269 5.22 190
5 WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIET 334 4.10 38,196 2.72 114 New Castle, DE Not Hispanic Refinance
6 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS 305 3.74 60,401 4.31 198
7 QUICKEN LOANS 272 3.34 50,438 3.60 185
8 WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY 215 2.64 34,084 2.43 159
9 FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NA 180 2.21 30,430 2.17 169
10 BENEFICIAL COMPANY LLC 154 1.89 23,147 1.65 150
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Appendix 3:
PHFA Approved HEMAP Counseling Agencies
In Study Countiesxxi
BERKS County
American Credit Counseling Institute
937 North Hanover Street
Pottstown, PA 19460
888.212.6741
888.212.6741
American Financial Counseling Services Inc.
2880 Bergey Road
Hatfield, PA 19440
Suite H
267.228.7903
800.490.3039
American Financial Counseling Services Inc.
906 Penn Avenue
Wyomissing, PA 19610
267.228.7903
800.490.3039
Budget Counseling Center
247 North Fifth Street
Reading, PA 19601
610.375.7866
CCCS of Lehigh Valley
3671 Crescent Court East
Whitehall, PA 18052
610.821.4011
800.837.9815
Community Action Committee
of the Lehigh Valley
Bethlehem, PA 18015
1337 East Fifth Street
610.691.5620
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Neighborhood Housing Services of Reading
213 N 5th Street
Reading, PA 19601
Suite 1030
610.372.8433
PA Interfaith Community Programs Inc.
Northeast Region
Hamburg, PA 19526
22 Willow Road
610.562.2288
Schuylkill Community Action
225 N. Centre Street
Pottsville, PA 17901
570.622.1995
LANCASTER County
American Credit Counseling Institute
229 E Chestnut Street
Coatesville, PA 19320
1st Floor
888.212.6741
888.212.6741
Base, Inc.
447 South Prince Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
717.392.5467
CCCS of Lehigh Valley
3671 Crescent Court East
Whitehall, PA 18052
610.821.4011
800.837.9815
CCCS of Western PA
55 Clover Hill Road
Dallastown, PA 17313
888.511.2227
888.511.2227
Tabor Community Services, Inc.
308 E King Street
Lancaster, PA 17602
Suite 1
717.397.5182
800.788.5062
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
LEHIGH County
American Credit Counseling Institute
212 Berwick-Hazelton Hwy
Nescopeck, PA 18635
888.468.8847
American Credit Counseling Institute
937 North Hanover Street
Pottstown, PA 19460
888.212.6741
888.212.6741
American Credit Counseling Institute
530 West Street Road
Warminster, PA 18974
Suite 201
215.444.9429
888.212.6741
CCCS of Lehigh Valley
3671 Crescent Court East
Whitehall, PA 18052
610.821.4011
800.837.9815
Community Action Committee
of the Lehigh Valley
Bethlehem, PA 18015
1337 East Fifth Street
610.691.5620
Schuylkill Community Action
225 N. Centre Street
Pottsville, PA 17901
570.622.1995
NORTHAMPTON County
American Credit Counseling Institute
530 West Street Road
Warminster, PA 18974
Suite 201
215.444.9429
888.212.6741
CCCS of Lehigh Valley
3671 Crescent Court East
Whitehall, PA 18052
610.821.4011
800.837.9815
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Community Action Committee
of the Lehigh Valley
Bethlehem, PA 18015
1337 East Fifth Street
610.691.5620
PHILADELPHIA County
Acorn Housing Corporation
846 North Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19130
215.765.1221
Advocates for Financial Independence
1806 South Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19145
Suite 1 B
215.389.2810
American Credit Counseling Institute
530 West Street Road
Warminster, PA 18974
Suite 201
215.444.9429
888.212.6741
American Financial Counseling Services
1917 Welsh Road
Philadelphia, PA 19115
267.228.7903
American Financial Counseling Services Inc.
175 Strafford Avenue
Wayne, PA 19087
Suite One
267.228.7903
800.490.3039
APM
600 West Diamond Street
Philadelphia, PA 19122
215.235.6070
Carroll Park Community Council, Inc.
5218 Master Street
Philadelphia, PA 19131
215.877.1157
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
CCCS of Delaware Valley
4400 North Reese Street
Philadelphia, PA 19140
215.563.5665
CCCS of Delaware Valley
Catholic Social Services Building
Philadelphia, PA 19136
7340 Jackson Street
215.563.5665
CCCS of Delaware Valley
One Cherry Hill
Cherry Hill, PA 08002
Suite 215
215.563.5665
CCCS of Delaware Valley
1608 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
10th Floor
215.563.5665
CCCS of Delaware Valley
1001 East Lincoln Highway
Coatesville, PA 19320
Suite 102
215.563.5665
CCCS of Delaware Valley
113 East Main Street
Norristown, PA 19401
2nd Floor
215.563.5665
Centro Pedro Claver, Inc.
523 West Erie Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19140
215.227.7111
Chester Community Improvement Project
412 Avenue of the States
Chester, PA 19016
PO Box 541
610.876.8663
Congreso
216 West Somerset Street
Philadelphia, PA 19133
215.763.8870
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Council of Spanish Speaking Organization
705-09 North Franklin Street
Philadelphia, PA 19123
215.627.3100
Diversified Community Services
Dixon House
Philadelphia, PA 19145
1920 South 20th Street
215.336.3511
Esperanza
4261 North 5th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19140
215.324.0746
Germantown Settlement
5538 Wayne Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19144
Bldg C
215.849.3104
Grace Neighborhood Development Corp.
5200 Oxford Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19124
215.535.3885
HACE
167 W. Allegheny Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19140
2nd Fl
215.426.8025
Housing Association of Delaware Valley
658 North Watts Street
Philadelphia, PA 19123
215. 978.0224
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Housing Association of Delaware Valley
658 N. Watts Street
Philadelphia, PA 19102
215.978.0224
Intercultural Family Services, Inc.
4225 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
215.386.1298
Korean Community Development Services Center
6055 North 5th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19120
215.276.8830
Liberty Resources
714 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Suite 100
215.634.2000
Mt. Airy, USA
6703 Germantown Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19119
Suite 200
215.844.6021
New Kensington Community Development Corp
2515 Frankford Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19125
215.427.0350
Northwest Counseling Service
5001 North Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19141
215.324.7500
Opportunity Inc.
Two Bala Plaza
Philadelphia, PA 19004
Suite 300
610.660.6687
Phila Council For Community Advmnt
100 North 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Suite 600
215.567.7803
800.930.4663
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Philadelphia Senior Center
509 South Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19147
215.546.5879
South Philadelphia H.O.M.E.S.
1314 South 22nd Street
Philadelphia, PA 19146
215.546.0699
Southwest Community Development Corporation
6328 Paschall Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19142
215.729.0800
The Partnership CDC
4020 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Suite 100
215.662.1612
United Communities Southeast Philadelphia
2029 South 8th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19148
215.467.8700
Universal Community Homes
800 South 15th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19146
215.732.6518
Urban League of Philadelphia
1801 Market Street
20th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215.561.6070
West Oak Lane CDC
6259 Limekiln Pike
Philadelphia, PA 19141
215.224.0880
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Appendix 4:
Geographic Distribution of Foreclosure
Filings by County
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 1: Berks County Foreclosure Filings and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 2: Berks County Foreclosure Filings and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 3: Berks County Foreclosure Filings and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 4: Berks County (Reading Area) and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 5: Berks County (Reading Area) and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 6: Berks County (Reading Area) and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 7: Lancaster County Foreclosure Filings and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 8: Lancaster County and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 9: Lancaster County and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 10: Lancaster County (Lancaster City Area) and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 11: Lancaster County (Lancaster City Area) and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 12: Lancaster County (Lancaster City Area) and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 13: Lehigh County and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 14: Lehigh County and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 15: Lehigh County and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 16: Lehigh County (Allentown Area) and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 17: Lehigh County (Allentown Area) and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 18: Lehigh County (Allentown Area) and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 19: Northampton County and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 20: Northampton County and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 21: Northampton County and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 22: Philadelphia County and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 23: Philadelphia County and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 24: Philadelphia County and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 25: Philadelphia County (Lower North Philadelphia) and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 26: Philadelphia County (Lower North Philadelphia) and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 27: Philadelphia County (Lower North Philadelphia) and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 28: New Castle County and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 29: New Castle County and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 30: New Castle County and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 31: New Castle County (Wilmington Area) and Foreclosure Filing Density
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 32: New Castle County (Wilmington Area) and Area Percent Hispanic
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 33: New Castle County (Wilmington Area) and Median Home Price
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 34: Berks County (Reading Area) HEMAP Applications
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 35: Lancaster County (Lancaster City Area) HEMAP Applications
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 36: Lehigh & Northampton Counties (Allentown-Bethlehem Area) HEMAP Applications
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
Map 36: Philadelphia County (North Philadelphia Area) HEMAP Applications
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
End Notes:
i Unless otherwise noted, “2007 (3-yr)” refers to the three-year running estimates from the American Community
Survey. The three years are 2005 through 2007, inclusive.
ii
The U.S. Census’ undercount of the Hispanic population of the U.S. is well known and documented.
Undercount, in and of itself, is a problem. But what is more problematic for all of the various purposes to which
the Census is put, is the differential undercount of groups of people. In preparation for the 2010 Census, many
steps are underway to get closer to the accurate count. The Hispanic population, compared to other groups,
poses some unique challenges (e.g., language, recency of immigration) for which the Census is fashioning
programmatic responses.
iii American Housing Survey for the United States: 2007.
iv Note that income reported in the 2000 Census is actually 1999; the 2007 income is the three-year ACS estimate
in 2007 inflation-adjusted dollars.
v It is important to note that both the value and loan-to-value data reported here refer to survey respondents’
estimates of home values reported as of 2007. This is right around the time that the most significant drops in
home prices occurred (i.e., the later part of 2007). Accordingly these data likely overstate both the value and
equity of households.
vi See: Avery, Robert B., Kenneth P. Brevoort, and Glenn B. Canner. 2008. “The 2007 HMDA Data.” Federal
Reserve Bulletin, Vol. 94 (December), pp. A107-A146.
vii This finding is supportive of the finding reported by Bowdler in her study of the impact of predatory lending
on Hispanic homeowners. (see: Bowdler, Janis. 2005. “Jeopardizing Hispanic Homeownership: Predatory
practices in the homebuying market.” National Council of La Raza, Issue Brief No. 15.)
viii In the Federal Reserve Board’s analysis of the 2007 Survey of Consumer Finances, they find that the leverage
ratio (defined as the sum of all debt / sum of all assets) of non-white or Hispanic households nationally is
substantially higher than it is for White families. Specifically, for the years 1998, 2001, 2004 and 2007 they
identify the White ratios as 13.3, 11.0, 13.5, and 12.9; for non-whites or Hispanics the ratios are 23.5, 23.4, 27.2,
and 27.1. (see: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2009/pdf/scf09.pdf)
ix The term subprime pricing is used to reference that circumstance where the loans borrowers received, had
APR’s that exceeded the reporting thresholds for HMDA. That is, for a first lien, the APR was three or more
points higher than the prevailing Treasury rate; for a subordinate lien, the APR was five or more points higher
than the prevailing Treasury rate (see: http://www.ffiec.gov/hmda/pdf/regulationc2004.pdf for the actual rule
guiding HMDA).
x See, for example, Avery, Robert B. and Glenn B. Canner. 2005. “New Information Reported under HMDA and
Its Application in Fair Lending Enforcement.” Federal Reserve Bulletin, Summer, pp. 344-394. Avery and
Canner present an analysis that attempts to correct for some of the data limitations inherent with HMDA in its
exploration of differential denial and subprime lending rates by race and ethnicity. Their findings suggest that
although much of the difference between minority and White (non-Hispanic) applicants can be explained by
borrower and other economic and transaction-related characteristics, there remains significant and non-trivial
differences between White (non-Hispanic) and Hispanic and White (non-Hispanic) and Black
applicants/borrowers.
xi The Wall Street Journal reported the results of a study that First American Loan Performance conducted for
them seeking to understand how frequently borrowers with prime loan-worthy credit attributes, received
subprime loans. Based on analysis of $2.5 trillion in subprime loans originated between 2000 and 2006, they
found that approximately 55% of borrowers in 2005 - the peak year for subprime lending - with prime credit
characteristics received subprime loans. The percentage in 2000 was 41%; by 2006, the percentage rose to 61%.
(See: Brooks, Rick and Ruth Simon “Subprime Debacle Traps Even Very Credit-Worthy”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119662974358911035.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news)
xii See: http://www.phfa.org/consumers/homeowners/hemap.aspx for a completed program description.
xiii Because HEMAP data cover applications through mid-year 2008, in order to annualize the applications we
simply multiplied by 2.0 the counts reported. Assuming the second part of the year is similar to the first, this
“correction” is reasonable. If however volume in the second part of 2008 was remarkably different than the first
part, our “correction” will be misleading.
Impacts of Changes in the Home Mortgage Market on Hispanic
Homeowners in Pennsylvania and Delaware
xiv Because applicants can cite more than one precipitating reason for the need for HEMAP assistance, the
percentages will not add to 100%. The percentages shown in Figure 17 are the percentage of applications on
which the specified reason was indicated.
xv Government-insured loans are ineligible for HEMAP assistance.
xvi The location of housing counseling agencies was obtained for all counties, not just study counties. For this
analysis it is critical because there may be instances where the nearest counseling agency is just over a county line.
By having the location of all agencies, we negate this problem and get a true estimate of the shortest distance to a
service.
xvii Our assessment of the capacity to provide services in Spanish comes from two sources: (1) the advertised
capacity of the agency based on the PHFA or HUD directories; (2) the websites of agencies; (3) telephone
verification.
xviii Zip codes with fewer than 10 loans in the sample are excluded from the computation of percentages,
percentage changes and medians.
xix This “mystery shopper” approach was suggested as an adjunct to the survey of counseling agencies by senior
officials from the FHLB and PHFA.
xx See, for example HUD’s “Discrimination in Metropolitan Housing Markets: National Results from Phase I
HDS” published in 2002. http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/Phase1_Report.pdf
xxi http://www.phfa.org/forms/counseling_agencies/hemap_agencies/hemap.pdf
About TRF
The Reinvestment Fund (TRF) is a national innovator in capitalizing distressed communities
and stimulating economic growth for low- and moderate-income families. TRF identifies the
point of impact where capital can deliver its greatest financial and social influence. TRF’s
investments in homes, schools and businesses reclaim and transform neighborhoods, driving
economic growth and improving lives throughout the Mid-Atlantic region. Since its inception
in 1985, TRF has made more than $840 million in community investments. TRF’s Policy
Solutions division has emerged as a highly regarded source of objective information for public
officials and private investors in the mid-Atlantic Region. TRF’s analytical strength is also
reflected in its newly created national online data and mapping tool that is available to all
internet users at PolicyMap.com. To learn more about TRF, visit www.trfund.com.