The Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Research Institute for Housing America (RIHA) released a report entitled “Stabilizing Vulnerable Homeowners in a Time of Crisis: Insights from the Homeowner Assistance Fund,” examining the impact of the $10 billion Homeowner Assistance Fund (HAF), a federal program launched in 2021 to support homeowners affected by the pandemic.

“There has been a lot of attention to COVID-19 era mortgage forbearance policies that are now a permanent part of the loss mitigation waterfall for homeowners with federally backed mortgages,” said Dr. Stephanie Moulton, professor and associate dean for faculty and research at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs at The Ohio State University. “This is the first study to examine the $10 billion HAF program and the homeowners who benefited. The insights from this report help us think about potential gaps in the loss mitigation waterfall and the types of homeowners who may benefit from targeted support when they experience a crisis.”

The report analyzed the distribution and use of HAF assistance nationwide, the differences in state implementation and the characteristics of borrowers who received support. It compared the characteristics of Ohio homeowners who received mortgage payment forbearance during the pandemic to Ohio homeowners who received assistance through HAF, in addition to or instead of forbearance.

“Pandemic-era housing policy interventions proved highly effective in stabilizing the mortgage market and helping the vast majority of homeowners avoid foreclosure during an unprecedented economic shock,” said Edward Seiler, executive director of RIHA, and MBA associate vice president, housing economics. “The research highlights not only the success of broad-based relief efforts like forbearance, but also the critical role of targeted programs such as the HAF in supporting more vulnerable borrowers. As we look ahead, these findings offer important lessons for how policymakers and industry stakeholders can respond to future economic disruptions while promoting sustainable homeownership.”

Key findings from the report include:

• HAF programs served vulnerable homeowners, with more than 90 percent of funds distributed nationwide to homeowners with incomes below the area median.
• HAF beneficiaries were geographically concentrated in areas that were more distressed during the pandemic, as measured by higher rates of unemployment and mortgage delinquency.
• While the majority of HAF funds were used to cover mortgage payments, HAF programs also helped with non-mortgage homeowner expenses like utility payments and property taxes.
• In addition to traditional mortgages, HAF mortgage assistance helped with non-traditional types of credit instruments such as reverse mortgages, land contracts or mortgages with complex titles.
• More than one in 10 of the 100,000 Ohio homeowners with mortgages who subsequently received assistance for missed mortgage payments during the pandemic received HAF in addition to or instead of forbearance.
• About 16 percent of Ohio HAF recipients received mortgage payment forbearance prior to receiving assistance through HAF.
• Ohio homeowners receiving mortgage payment forbearance disproportionately held government backed Federal Housing Administration, Veterans Affairs, or government-sponsored entity loans.
• About one-third of the Ohio homeowners receiving assistance through HAF did not have evidence of a mortgage on their credit file, while 80 percent of homeowners receiving assistance for non-mortgage expenses did not have evidence of a mortgage.