CDFI market conditions Q309
CDFI Market Conditions Report Third Quarter 2009 Published December 2009
The Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report is a quarterly publication based on quarterly surveys of community development financial institutions (CDFIs). Opportunity Finance Network began conducting these surveys in October 2008 to better understand the impacts of tight credit markets and the economic downturn on the opportunity finance industry. Each report provides a near-real-time view of market conditions and CDFI responses, analysis of regional and financing sector differences, and analysis of important trends. This CDFI Market Conditions Report is possible thanks to the generous support of the Ford Foundation.
Opportunity Finance Network Public Ledger Building 620 Chestnut Street Suite 572 Philadelphia, PA 19106-3413
P 215.923.4754 F 215.923.4755 www.opportunityfinance.net
CDFI Market Conditions Report Third Quarter 2009 Published December 2009 The Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report is a quarterly publication based on quarterly surveys of community development financial institutions (CDFIs). Opportunity Finance Network began conducting these surveys in October 2008 to better understand the impacts of tight credit markets and the economic downturn on the opportunity finance industry. Each report provides a near-real-time view of market conditions and CDFI responses, analysis of regional and financing sector differences as well as by asset size, and analysis of important trends. These data can assist CDFIs and investors alike to plan for the future. This report presents the results of the fifth consecutive quarterly CDFI Market Conditions Survey conducted in October 2009 and covering the third quarter (July - September) of 2009. One hundred twenty-one CDFIs responded to the survey. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The third quarter of 2009 was a period of continued but slower economic decline. The national unemployment rate rose from 9.2% in the second quarter to 9.6% in the third quarter.1 The percentage of FDIC-insured institutions’ loans and leases 30 days or more past due increased from 6.20% in the second quarter to 6.86% in the third quarter.2 The non-current rate (4.94%) was the largest in the 26 years these data have been tracked. On a more positive note, the increase in noncurrent loans was the smallest in the past four quarters, as the rate of growth in noncurrent loans slowed for the second quarter in a row. Mortgages in foreclosure ticked up 17 basis points to 4.47% and the delinquency rate for loans on one-to-four-unit mortgages rose by 40 basis points over the second quarter and 265 basis points over the third quarter 2008 to a seasonally adjusted 9.64%, the highest since the Mortgage Bankers Association began tracking these data in 1972.3 Key Survey Findings: Third Quarter and Trend Analysis The findings presented below are for all 121 survey respondents. Overall, the results are closer to the first quarter 2009 than the second quarter 2009 results. Findings for specific subgroups (asset sizes, primary financing sectors, and regions) are presented in the body of the report. Substantial differences occur among these breakout groups. Demand continues to increase but at a slower pace: 57% of respondents reported an increase in the number of financing applications received in the 3rdQ09 over the 2ndQ09; 61% reported an increase over the 3rdQ08. The trend in the percentage of CDFIs experiencing increasing demand is declining. Originations are increasing for more CDFIs: 50% of respondents reported an increase in originations in the 3rdQ09 over the 2ndQ09; 43% reported an increase over the 3rdQ08. The primary reasons for originations not keeping pace with demand are tightened lending criteria and poor application quality. The trend in new originations is an uneven increase, from 36% in the first quarter to 48% in the third quarter, with a bump to 64% in the second quarter. Delinquency is increasing for more CDFIs: 42% of respondents reported an increase in delinquency over the 2ndQ09. Even more (47%) reported an increase over the 3rdQ08. The primary reason for the increasing rate was rising unemployment. The trend is uneven but upward: of the 47 CDFIs that provided change in delinquency data in the last three surveys, nearly half (49%) reported an increase in 1
US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2 1.92% of loans and leases were 30 – 89 days past due and 4.94% were noncurrent, defined as 90 or more days past due or in nonaccrual. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Quarterly Banking Profile. 3 Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) National Delinquency Survey.
i
delinquency in the 3rdQ09, up from 43% in the 1stQ09, and jumping 15 percentage points after a decline in the 2ndQ09. Average portfolio at risk is rising, from 8.8% in the 1stQ09 to 9.3% in the 3rdQ094. The volumes of workouts and term extensions are stabilizing: Half of the respondents reported no change in the number of loans in workout over the 2ndQ09 and 62% reported no change in the number of term extensions. The trends for both are uneven but show a gradual increase in the numbers of CDFIs with no change. Liquidity constraints have not changed: Nearly half (48%) of respondents reported that they were capital-constrained. The trend data show a very slight increase in the number of CDFIs reporting that they are capital constrained. Capital liquidity is increasing: Capital liquidity improved for nearly one-third (32%) of CDFIs in the 3rdQ09. The trend data show a sharp decline in the percentage of CDFIs reporting a decrease in liquidity in the 3rdQ09 over the previous two quarters. This may be a result of the 2009 CDFI Fund awards. Key Survey Findings: Outlook Respondents’ outlook for the next quarter and the steps they are taking to respond were similar to the second quarter with the exception of a more positive outlook on portfolio quality. Portfolio Quality: Nearly one-third (32%) of respondents expect portfolio quality to improve in the next quarter and 49% expect no change. The trend data show that the predominant response in all three quarters was that CDFIs expect no change; however, there is an upward trend in the percentage of CDFIs that expect their portfolio quality to improve, from 19% in the first quarter to 32% in the third quarter. Demand: 64% of respondents expect demand for financing to increase in the next quarter. The trend in outlook on demand is flat, with most CDFIs (64% to 70%) expecting demand to increase, a smaller portion (22% to 36%) expecting it to remain constant, and very few if any (0% to 9%) expecting it to decrease. Liquidity and Operating Challenges: Most CDFIs expect to experience new capital liquidity and/or operating difficulties in the next quarter. They are primarily concerned about having insufficient capital to meet growing demand, having fewer operating grants available to cover operations, increasing loan loss reserves, and the rising cost of borrowed capital. Thirty percent of respondents expect to have a decline in unrestricted net assets (an unrestricted loss) in their current fiscal year. The trend analysis shows an increase between the 1stQ09 and the 2ndQ09, but no change between the 2ndQ09 and the 3rdQ09. Expected declines in unrestricted net assets were primarily due to increased charge-offs, increased loan loss reserves, and not receiving a CDFI Fund award. CDFI Response to Liquidity and Operating Challenges: CDFIs are responding to expected liquidity and operating challenges in a number of ways, with the most common responses being to seek new grant funding (69%) and to revise budgets (40%).
4
After 2ndQ09 outliers are removed from the dataset.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary I.
Survey Respondents
i 1
II. Survey Results – All Respondents A. Third Quarter and Trend Results B. Outlook for the Next Quarter
3 3 15
III. Results by Asset Size A. Third Quarter and Trend Results B. Outlook for the Next Quarter
22 22 29
IV. Results by Primary Financing Sector A. Business B. Business CDFIs by Region C. Commercial Real Estate D. Community Services/Facilities E. Consumer F. Housing to Individuals G. Housing to Organizations H. Housing to Organizations CDFIs by Region I. Microenterprise
32 32 34 36 39 42 45 48 50 53
V. Results by Region A. Midwest B. Northeast C. South D. West
56 56 59 62 65
Appendices Appendix 1: Definitions A. Financing Sector B. Regions and Divisions C. Asset Categories
68 68 69 69
Appendix 2. Changes in Survey Questions over Time
70
Appendix 3. Survey Respondents – All Respondents, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09
71
Appendix 4. Survey Respondents – Trend Sample, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09
72
Appendix 5. Results for All Respondents, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09
73
Appendix 6. Trend Analysis, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09
76
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued Appendix 7. Results by Asset Size 7 A. All Small CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 7 B. All Medium CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 7 C. All Large CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 7 D. Trend Analysis for Small CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 7 E. Trend Analysis for Medium CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 7 F. Trend Analysis for Large CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09
78 78 80 82 84 86 88
Appendix 8. Results by Financing Sector 8 A. All Business CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 B. All Commercial Real Estate, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 C. All Community Services/Facilities, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 D. All Consumer, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 E. All Housing to Individuals, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 F. All Housing to Organizations, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 G. All Microenterprise, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 8 H. Trend Analysis for Business CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 8 I. Trend Analysis for Housing to Organizations CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09
90 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106
Appendix 9. Results by Region 9 A. All Midwest CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 9 B. All Northeast CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 9 C. All South CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 9 D. All West CDFIs, 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 9 E. Trend Analysis for Midwest CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 9 F. Trend Analysis for Northeast CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 9 G. Trend Analysis for South CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 9 H. Trend Analysis for West CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09
108 108 110 112 114 116 118 120 122
iv
I. SURVEY RESPONDENTS One hundred twenty one CDFIs responded to the third quarter survey. A large number (102 institutions or 84%) are loan funds; fifteen are credit unions, three are banks, and one is a venture capital fund. Sixtyfour percent of respondents are OFN Members. Respondents are headquartered in all U.S. Census Bureau regions, with the highest concentration in the South and the lowest in the West. One respondent is located in Puerto Rico and we have included it in the South region. See Appendix 1 for a list of states included in each region. Figure 1. Number of Respondents by Headquarters Location 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
40 31 27 23
South
Northeast
Midwest
West
Slightly more than half (54%) of the respondents serve primarily urban markets, 27% serve primarily rural markets, and the remaining 19% serve both equally. Respondents provide a range of financing. Recognizing that many CDFIs provide financing to more than one sector, we report the primary sector below. The largest primary sectors are Housing to Organizations and Business. Figure 2. Number of Respondents by Primary Financing Sector Housing to Organizations
29
Business
26
Housing to Individuals
17
Consumer
14
Microenterprise
13
Commercial Real Estate
8
Community Services/Facilities
5
Other
2 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
For a more complete description of the 121 respondents, see Appendix 2. Forty-seven of the third quarter respondents also responded to the first and second quarter 2009 surveys. We use this subset of 47 CDFIs to perform trend analyses of the first through third quarter 2009. The trend
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
1
sample is not representative of the full third quarter sample in terms of institution type, region, sector, or asset size. The differences are due to two factors. First, more credit unions completed the third quarter survey than previous surveys, affecting the mix of institution types and changing the mix of sectors to include more consumer lenders. Second, a higher percentage of third quarter respondents are from the South, possibly due to OFN holding its annual conference in Charlotte in October 2009. For a complete description of the trend sample, see Appendix 3.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
2
II.
SURVEY RESULTS – ALL RESPONDENTS A. Third Quarter and Trend Results
In this section, we provide aggregate results. For all respondents, results include changes over the previous quarter and, for some questions, changes over the same quarter in the previous year. We report trend analysis for the subset of CDFIs that responded to the three most recent quarterly surveys. Demand and Originations: Demand for financing continues to increase for most CDFIs. More than half of the respondents (57%) experienced an increase in demand in the third quarter over the second quarter. Within the group that reported increases over the second quarter, 8% reported an increase of 50% or more. More than one quarter (27%) saw no change and 16% saw the number of applications decrease. The magnitude of the decrease was less than 50% for all but three CDFIs. Not all of the CDFIs that experienced an increase in demand responded with an increase in new originations. One-half reported an increase over the previous quarter, 21% a decrease and 29% reported no change. The two main reasons for originations not keeping pace with demand are tightened lending criteria and weak application quality. Figure 3. Change in the Number of Financing Applications Received and Loans/Investments Originated, 3rd Q2009 (n = 121, 120) 60%
57% 50%
50% 40% 27%
30%
29%
21% 20%
Applications
Originations
16%
10% 0% Increased
Decreased
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change
3
Comparing the third quarter 2009 to one year earlier, 61% of CDFIs reported an increase in financing applications received over the third quarter 2008. With respect to originations, 43% originated more loans in the third quarter 2009 than in the third quarter 2008; 28% originated fewer loans than a year earlier. Figure 4. Annual Change in the Number of Financing Applications Received and Loans/Investments Originated, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 120, 120) 70% 61%
% of Respondents
60% 50% 43%
Application s
40% 30%
28%
30%
Origination s
20%
19%
Decreased
No Change
20% 10% 0% Increased
Looking at the trend over the past three quarters, we see a steady decrease in the percentage of CDFIs experiencing an increase in financing applications, falling from 60% in the first quarter of the year to 51% in the third quarter. Figure 5. Trend in the Change in the Number of Financing Applications Received, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Q2009 (n = 47, 45, 45) 70% 60% 60%
58% 51%
50% 40% 29%
30%
32%
24%
20%
16%
13%
1st Qtr 2009 2nd Qtr 2009 3rd Qtr 2009
17%
10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
4
At the same time, the trend in new originations is an uneven increase, from 36% in the first quarter to 48% in the third quarter, with a bump to 64% in the second quarter. Figure 6. Change in the Number of Loans/Investments Originated, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Q2009 (n = 46, 47, 47) 70%
64%
60% 48%
50% 36%
40%
32%
33%
32%
1st Qtr 2009
26%
30%
2nd Qtr 2009
20%
20%
3rd Qtr 2009
11% 10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Portfolio Quality: Forty-two percent of respondents reported an increase in delinquency between the second and third quarter. Even more (47%) reported an increase over the delinquency rate one year earlier. The primary reason for the increasing rate was rising unemployment. Figure 7. Change in Delinquencies, 3rd Q2009 (n = 121) 45%
42% 38%
% of Respondents
40% 35% 30% 25%
20%
20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
5
Figure 8. Annual Change in Delinquencies, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 120) 50%
47%
45% % of Respondents
40% 35%
31%
30% 23%
25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
The trend is uneven but rising: of the 47 CDFIs that provided change in delinquency data in the last three surveys, nearly half (49%) reported an increase in delinquency in the third quarter, up from 43% in the first quarter, and jumping 15 percentage points after a decline in the second quarter. Figure 9. Change in Delinquencies, 1st, 2nd and 3rd Q2009 (n = 47, 47, 47) 60% 50% 40%
49% 43% 38% 34%
34%
32%
32% 1stQtr 2009
30% 19%
20%
2nd Qtr 2009
19%
3rd Qtr 2009
10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
6
Workouts increased for 43% of 3rd quarter respondents, but a majority of respondents reported no change (50%). Figure 10. Change in the Number of Loans/Investments in Workout, 3rd Q2009 (n = 121) 60% 50%
% of Respondents
50%
43%
40% 30% 20% 7%
10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Figure 11 compares changes in workouts in the first, second and third quarters and shows that the percentage of CDFIs that had an increase in workouts increased from 48% to 51% from 1st quarter to 2nd quarter, but then decreased to 38% during the third quarter. Also, while in the first and second quarter only 9% of CDFIs had a decrease this number rose to 13% in third quarter. Figure 11. Change in the Number of Loans/Investments in Workout, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Q2009 (n = 47, 45, 46) 60% 50% 40%
48%
51%
49% 43% 38%
40% 1st Qtr 2009
30%
2nd Qtr 2009
20% 9% 9%
10%
3rd Qtr 2009
13%
0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
7
One of the other ways that CDFIs manage troubled loans is by granting term extensions. Thirty-two percent of respondents reported increases in the number of extensions granted during the third quarter, while most (62%) granted the same number of extensions as in the previous quarter. Figure 12. Change in the Number of Loans Given Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n = 120) 70%
62%
% of Respondents
60% 50% 40%
32%
30% 20% 7%
10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
The trend in increases in term extensions appears to be a decline, with only 21% of CDFIs granting more extensions in the third quarter compared to 30% or more in the previous two quarters. Most are holding the number of extensions granted constant. Figure 13. Change in the Number of Loans Given Term Extensions, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Q2009 (n = 47, 45, 46) 66%
70%
61%
60%
58%
50% 40% 30% 30%
33%
1st Qtr 2009 2nd Qtr 2009
21%
3rd Qtr 2009
20% 9% 9%
10%
13%
0% Increase
Decrease
No Change
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
8
To further mitigate the risk within their portfolios, nearly half (44%) of respondents increased their loan loss reserve ratio ($ loan loss reserve / $ loans outstanding). Figure 14. Change in Loan Loss Reserve Ratio, 3rd Q2009 (n = 121)
% of Respondents
50%
45%
44%
40% 30% 20% 12% 10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
The trend in loan loss reserve ratios is uneven, but shows a tendency for more CDFIs to be holding reserve ratios constant and fewer increasing them. Figure 15. Change in Loan Loss Reserve Ratio, 1st, 2nd & 3rd Q2009 (n = 47, 47, 47) 60% 50% 40%
49% 45%
43%
43% 38%
36%
1st Qtr 2009
30%
2nd Qtr 2009
17%
20%
3rd Qtr 2009
15% 15%
10% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
Portfolio at Risk: In analyzing portfolio at risk (defined as the balance outstanding of loans with payments 30 or more days past due divided by total loans oustanding), we identified five CDFIs that skewed the averages. Four of these are CDFIs that reported exceptionally high portfolio at risk rates of greater than 40% in the second quarter and that did not respond to the survey in the third quarter. We removed these outliers from the results presented in this section. A fifth CDFI had a dramatic decrease in portfolio at risk between the second and third quarters, falling from 74% to 21%. We removed this outlier from the trend analysis presented below. Like the larger financial services industry, CDFIs’ portfolio quality weakened in the third quarter.5 On average, as of September 30, 9.3% of a CDFI’s loan portfolio was at risk, up from 9.0% at the end of the second quarter. Analysis of the subset of CDFIs that responded to the three most recent surveys shows similar results, with PAR rising from 8.2% in the second quarter to 8.7% in the third quarter. Among all
5
The response rate on this question was lower than the others, with 107 (88%) respondents providing these data.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
9
FDIC-insured institutions, the aggregate portfolio at risk (PAR) jumped by 66 basis points during the same period.6 Table 2. Average Portfolio at Risk, 2nd and 3rd Q2009 Removing Outliers 30-60 60-90 N days days nd All Respondents 2 Qtr 110 2.4% 1.3% All Respondents 3rd Qtr 107 2.6% 1.1% All Trend Respondents 2nd Qtr All Trend Respondents 3rd Qtr
44 43
1.6% 2.5%
0.9% 1.1%
90+ days 5.2% 5.6%
Total PAR 9.0% 9.3%
5.7% 5.1%
8.2% 8.7%
As in previous quarters, the 90 plus days category continues to be the largest portion at risk. This finding holds true for the subset of CDFIs that responded to the last three quarters surveys. It also holds true for all of the third quarter breakouts provided in the regional and sectoral sections of this report except one: the community services/facilities lenders’ delinquency is concentrated in the 31-60 day range. Table 1 shows portfolio at risk for all respondents as well as for respondents that reported increasing, decreasing or no change in delinquency in the third quarter. Those CDFIs whose delinquency is increasing have the highest rate (10.7%) and those whose delinquency is decreasing have the lowest rate (6.7%). Table 3. Average Portfolio at Risk, 3rd Q2009
All Respondents Respondents reporting increased delinquency Respondents reporting decreased delinquency Respondents reporting no change in delinquency
N 107 44 24 39
30-60 days 2.6% 2.6% 1.4% 3.3%
60-90 days 1.1% 1.9% 0.9% 0.4%
90+ days 5.6% 6.2% 4.4% 5.6%
Total PAR 9.3% 10.7% 6.7% 9.4%
Net charge-offs were 0.8% of portfolio outstanding in the first quarter. CDFIs with decreases in delinquency had higher charge-offs (1.2%), which may be one of the reasons delinquencies decreased. Table 4. Average Net Charge-offs, 3rd Q2009 All Respondents Respondents reporting increased delinquency Respondents reporting decreased delinquency Respondents reporting no change in delinquency
n 107 42 24 38
Charge-Offs 0.8% 1.0% 1.2% 0.3%
6
Portfolio at risk is defined as the outstanding balance of loans with payments 30 days or more past due / total outstanding balance. The FDIC figure is an aggregate, referring to the sum of all institutions’ portfolio at risk dollars divided by the sum of all institutions’ dollar amount of loans outstanding. The CDFI figure is an average, referring to the sum of each individual institution’s portfolio at risk percentage divided by the number of institutions. While the measurements are not exactly the same, the trend comparison is relevant.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
10
Capital Liquidity: Nearly half (48%) of respondents reported that they were capital-constrained. Thirteen percent were debt-constrained, 12% were equity-constrained, and 23% have both debt and equity constraints. Figure 16. Capital Constraints, 3rd Q2009 (n = 117) 60% 52% 50% 40% 30%
23%
20%
13%
12%
Debt
Equity
10% 0% Both
Neither
The trend data show a very slight increase in the number of CDFIs reporting that they are capital constrained, 53% in the third quarter versus 51% in the second quarter. Of the 94 respondents that tried to access capital in the third quarter through new investments or renewals, 23% reported that their ability to access capital had improved, slightly more (26%) reported a decrease in liquidity, and more than half experienced no change. Figure 17. Ability to Access Capital, 3rd Q2009 (n = 94) 60% 51% % of Respondents
50% 40% 30%
23%
26%
20% 10% 0% Increased
Decreased
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change
11
Comparing the third quarter 2008 to one year earlier, the results are similar in proportion though fewer (44%) reported no change, and more experienced an increase (26%) or a decrease (30%) in access to capital. Figure 18. Annual Change in the Ability to Access Capital, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 94) 50%
44%
45% % of Respondents
40% 35% 30%
30% 26%
25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Increased
Decreased
No Change
For the CDFIs that completed the last three surveys the percentage reporting an increase in their ability to access capital increased from 19% to 24% between the first and the third quarters. Capital liquidity improved for nearly one-third (32%) of CDFIs in the third quarter. Figure 19. Change in Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 120) 50% 43% % of Respondents
40% 32% 30%
26%
20% 10% 0% Increased
Decreased
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change
12
Comparing the third quarter 2009 to third quarter 2008, the results are split more evenly, with more CDFIs (32%) reporting a decrease and fewer (35%) reporting no change. Figure 20. Annual Change in Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 120)
% of Respondents
50% 40%
35%
33%
32%
Increased
Decreased
30% 20% 10% 0% No Change
The trend data are more positive, with a sharp decline in the percentage of CDFIs reporting a decrease in liquidity between the first two quarters of the year (32% and 30%, respectively) to the third quarter (21%) and 40% reporting an increase in liquidity. Figure 21. Change in Capital Liquidity, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Q2009 (n =47, 46, 47) 60% 50% 50% 40%
40%
38%
38% 32% 30%
30%
30% 20%
20%
1st Qtr 2009 2nd Qtr 2009
21%
3rd Qtr 2009
10% 0% Increase
Decrease
No Change
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
13
Cost of Borrowed Capital: The average cost of borrowed capital remained constant for 83% of respondents. Figure 22. Change in Average Cost of Borrowed Capital, 3rd Q2009 (n= 117)
% of Respondents
100%
83%
80% 60% 40% 20%
9%
9%
Increased
Decreased
0% No Change
Operating liquidity7: Respondents are evenly distributed with respect to the amount of cash on hand to fund operations. Thirty-four percent have sufficient cash to cover 91-180 days of operations, 28% have 181-365 days, and 28% have more than 365 days. Twelve respondents (11%) reported 30 days or less; however, none of these commented that this was abnormal for their CDFI’s operations.
It should be noted that the adequacy of a CDFI’s cash on hand is highly dependent on its primary type of financing and its business model.
7
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
14
B. Outlook for the Next Quarter The survey asked CDFIs to comment on their outlook for the next quarter and how they are responding to market conditions. Responses were similar to the second quarter with the exception of a more positive outlook on portfolio quality. Portfolio Quality: Nearly one-third (32%) of respondents expect portfolio quality to improve in the next quarter and 49% expect no change. For the subset of CDFIs that provided data for the previous three quarters, the trend data show that the predominant response in all three quarters was that CDFIs expect no change; however, there is an upward trend in the percentage of CDFIs that expect their portfolio quality to improve, from 19% in the first quarter to 32% in the third quarter. Figure 23. Do you anticipate that your portfolio quality is likely to change over the next quarter and if so why? (n = 113) 49%
50%
% of Respondents
40% 32% 30% 19%
20% 10% 0% Improve
Deteriorate
No Change
The main reasons for expecting improvements include financing less-risky deals that banks are no longer financing, tighter lending criteria, successful workouts that are resulting in repayments, and loan restructures. The biggest difference between the third quarter responses and the second quarter is that fewer CDFIs mentioned tighter lending criteria for new loans and more focused on the existing loan portfolio. The major reasons for expecting deterioration were the adverse effects of unemployment on business clients, lack of takeout financing for real estate deals, and increasing unemployment among single-family mortgage borrowers. The most common “Other” response was deterioration in the overall ecomomic situation. The full range of responses are reported in Figure 23a and Figure 23b. Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
15
Figure 23a. If you expect your portfolio quality to improve, why? (n = 36)
Improve because we have tightened our lending criteria
28%
Improve because we are financing less‐risky deals that banks are no longer financing
50%
Improve due to another reason
56%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Figure 23b. If you expect your portfolio quality to deteriorate, why? (n = 22) Deteriorate because increasing unemployment in the market is hurting business clients’ sales
45%
Deteriorate because of lack of takeout financing for real estate deals
32%
Deteriorate due to another reason
32%
Deteriorate because of increasing unemployment among single‐family mortgage borrowers
23% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
We used the trend sample to examine the accuracy of CDFIs’ expectations on their portfolio quality. Twelve CDFIs in the trend sample reported in the second quarter that they anticipated their portfolio quality would improve in the third quarter. In fact, in the third quarter portfolio quality improved for 50% of these 12 CDFIs, deteriorated for 25%, and did not change for the remaining 25%. Eight CDFIs in the same sample reported in the second quarter that they anticipated their portfolio quality would deteriorate in the third quarter. Among these eight CDFIs, the portfolio quality actually did deteriorate for 75%, increased for 12.5% and did not change for 12.5%.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
16
Demand: Nearly two-thirds (64%) of respondents expect demand for financing to increase in the next quarter. Figure 24. What is your sense of how demand for your organization's financing will change in the next quarter? (n = 113)
No change
30%
Expect demand to decrease
6%
Expect demand to increase
64%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
The trend in outlook on demand is flat, with most CDFIs (64% to 70%) expecting demand to increase, a smaller portion (22% to 36%) expecting it to remain constant, and very few if any (0% to 9%) expecting it to decrease. Figure 25. What is your sense of how demand for your organization's financing will change in the next quarter? 1st, 2nd & 3rd Q2009 (n = 47, 46, & 47) 100% 90% 80% 70%
64%
70%
64%
60% 1st Qtr 2009
50% 30%
22%
20% 10%
36%
34%
40%
2ndQtr 2009 3rd Qtr 2009
9% 2%
0%
0% Demand Increase Demand Decrease
No Change
The primary reason provided for why demand was expected to increase was once again the reduction in bank financing. The next most common reasons – albeit much less frequent -- were unemployment causing people to start small businesses and opportunities created through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). Comments include: “Expect demand to increase as banks continue to tighten their lending standards therefore turning down more quality applicants.” “As economy improves, and banks remain inactive, we will be asked to fill the void.”
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
17
“We are seeing a dramatic spike in loan requests. With other alternate lenders out of business and many banks avoiding our markets, we expect this trend to continue.” “Traditional sources of funding are not readily available and increased unemployment has caused growth in requests to start small businesses.” For the 32 CDFIs in the trend sample that responded in the second quarter that they anticipated their demand would increase, demand actually did increase for 59%, decreased for 13%, and did not change for 28%. For the four CDFIs in the same sample that responded that they anticipated their demand would decrease, only one saw this decrease in the third quarter, one stayed the same, and two actually experienced an increase. Liquidity and Operating Challenges: Most CDFIs continue to expect to experience new capital liquidity and/or operating difficulties in the next quarter. They are primarily concerned about having insufficient capital to meet growing demand, having fewer operating grants available to cover operations, increasing loan loss reserves, and the rising cost of borrowed capital. The full range of concerns is presented in Figure 26. Figure 26. If you expect your CDFI to experience new capital liquidity or operating difficulties in the next quarter, please explain why. (n = 76) We won’t have enough capital to meet growing demand We have fewer operating grants available to cover operations We need to increase loan loss reserves to cover problem loans
57% 43% 37%
Our cost of borrowed capital is rising
32%
Other
20%
We don’t have enough staff to manage problem loans Bank investors have begun to require that we secure their loans
17% 12%
Bank investors are not renewing our loans
11% 0%
20%
40%
60%
The most common “Other” reason given for new capital liquidity or operating difficulties is delinquency in repayments on existing loans: “Without the current borrowers’ repayment, it makes it difficult for us to meet our repayment obligations on existing debt with SBA.” “Development loans are "turning" more slowly, constricting liquidity to make new loans.” Among the 28 CDFIs that are concerned with increasing loan loss reserves, 48% expect the increasing reserves to reduce available capital to lend, 44% expect them to cause an operating deficit, and 22% expect them to cause their CDFI to trip net asset ratio or net income covenants. The percentage of CDFIs reporting concerns about covenants jumped in the third quarter from 9% in the second quarter. Further analysis shows that this increase does not hold true among the CDFIs in the trend sample where only one CDFI expected to trip a covenant.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
18
Nearly one-third (30%) of respondents expect to have a decline in unrestricted net assets (an unrestricted loss) in their current fiscal year. The trend analysis shows an increase between the first and second quarters (14% to 23%), but no change between the second and third quarters. Expected declines in unrestricted net assets were primarily due to increased loan loss reserves and loan charge-offs, as well as not receiving a CDFI Fund award. Comments include: “anticipated charge offs, implementation of new programs and not receiving a CDFI Fund award this year will likely cause an operating loss.” “Charge-offs, increasing Loan Loss Reserves and operating losses.” In spite of these difficulties, two-thirds of respondents (66%) reported that if market-rate debt capital or bond-financing were made available to them, they would have a sufficient level of net assets to support it. CDFI Fund Recovery Act Awards: Many CDFIs that applied for but did not receive a 2009 CDFI Fund Financial Assistance award are planning to apply in the 2010 round. The impact of not receiving a 2009 award varies but the most common response was insufficient lending capital that the CDFIs will have to try to obtain from other sources, followed by an operating deficit. Those that received the awards will overwhelmingly use the funds for loan capital. A number of awardees report using a portion of the award to fund loan loss reserves while others report using the awards for unrestricted net assets. CDFI Responses to Liquidity and Operating Challenges: CDFIs are responding to expected liquidity and operating challenges in a number of ways as shown in Table 5. Seeking new grant funding (69%) and revising budgets (40%) are the most common responses. Several respondents provided comments on how they are reducing operating expenses and to what extent they have reduced salaries. For example: “Across the board expense review and eliminating discretionary expenses to extent possible; vendor re-negotiation of terms.” “Reduced salaries by 10% in May 2009. Reduced vacation and sick accrual levels. Reduced operating expenses by cutting costs in marketing, office products, consulting, and postage.” Table 5. If you expect your CDFI to experience new capital liquidity or operating difficulties in the next quarter, what are you doing about them. (Top 10 responses provided) (n = 100) Seeking new grant funding 69% Revising our 2009/10 budget 40% Reducing loan sizes and/or terms 27% Laying off staff Reducing other operating expenses Freezing Salaries Implementing a hiring freeze
25% 25% 22% 22%
Creating a worst-case, contingency plan budget 17% Contracting consultants instead of hiring new staff 17% Requesting loan/investment covenant waivers 15% Note: Percentages do not add up to 100% because respondents were allowed to provide more than one response.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
19
Nearly all respondents are implementing new business strategies to respond to the changing market. The most common response is increased monitoring of the loan portfolio, followed by increased emphasis on technical assistance to borrowers and adjusting risk ratings. A complete list of responses is provided in Figure 27. Figure 27. What new business strategies and/or activities is your organization using to respond to changing market conditions? (n = 111) Monitoring borrowers more closely
84%
Providing additional technical assistance
58%
Adjusting risk ratings and reserves
57%
Tightening credit requirements
39%
Participating in loans with banks or CDFIs
36%
Conducting an organizational “stress test,” periodic sensitivity analyses, and/or a portfolio evaluation
35%
Developing new financing products
31%
Re‐appraising collateral
26%
Selling participations to other banks or CDFIs
20%
Other
7%
Have not implemented any new strategies or activities
4% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Thirty-one percent of respondents have introduced or are planning to introduce new financing products. The most common types of products reported were neighborhood stabilization and line-of-credit products. “Created new loan products to target NSP awardees and multifamily tax credit awardees.” “We have developed a revolving line of credit for housing developers in response to market demand. “ “Developed line of credit and credit builder loan products.” Responses in the “Other” category focused on new financing products including NSP and line-of-credit products and adding programs that bring in new sources of fee revenue: “We are implementing some lending related fees as well as increasing fee-related consulting work.” “Generating more revenue from 'service-based' activities as opposed to loan interest income” Finally, the survey asked the open-ended question “what other important changes, patterns, or trends are influencing how you plan to approach your work in the next two quarters?” We received a range of responses. These included concerns about the LIHTC market, lack of opportunities to participate with banks, and raising additional lending capital.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
20
90%
“The inability to participate loans with Banks, which we have successfully done for 21 years, is forcing us to be resourceful and creative in every aspect of our business.” “Most of our current loans are in tandem with other lenders. We will do more stand alone lending to customers do to banks reducing their loan activity.” “Right now, demand is way up for us -- we have never seen this many applications in one quarter before. We anticipate continued growth in demand -- so much of my time will be spent raising additional loan funds.”
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
21
III. RESULTS BY ASSET SIZE This section analyzes CDFIs by size of institution. We have divided CDFIs into three asset size categories: Small: Less than $10 million in assets (58 CDFIs) Medium: $10 million to $50 million in assets (38 CDFIs) Large: Greater than $50 million in assets (25 CDFIs) For each asset size, we provide quarterly and annual changes, as well as a trend analysis on the subset of CDFIs that completed the survey in each of the three most recent quarters. See Appendices 6A through 6C for the complete results by asset size. See Appendices 6D through 6F for the trend analyses by asset size. When interpreting the analysis, it is important to recognize the different sectoral compositions of the three asset size categories. Small has a concentration of Consumer CDFIs followed by Business CDFIs. Medium has a concentration of Business and Housing to Organizations CDFIs. By far the heaviest concentration in a single sector occurs among Large CDFIs: nearly half (46%) primarily finance Housing to Organizations. See Section III for a complete analysis by sector.
Commercial Real Estate
Community Services /Facilities Financing
Consumer
Housing to Individuals
Housing to Organizations
Microenterprise
Other
Type of Financing Small (53) Medium (37) Large (24)
Business
Table 6. Sectoral Composition of Asset Sizes, 3rd Q2009
19%
6%
0%
23%
17%
17%
17%
2%
32%
3%
5%
5%
19%
24%
11%
0%
17%
17%
13%
0%
4%
46%
0%
4%
A. Third Quarter and Trend Results Demand: In the third quarter, CDFIs in all asset size categories experienced increases in demand, with greater proportions of Medium and Large CDFIs seeing increases than Small CDFIs. Forty percent of small CDFIs saw no change in demand. Figure 28. Changes in Number of Financing Applications by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 58, 38, 25) 80% 68%
70%
60% 60% 50%
48% 40%
Increased
40%
Decreased
30% 20%
24% 12%
16%
16% 16%
No Change
10% 0%
Small
Medium
Large
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
22
Compared to a year ago, the increase is highest for Medium CDFIs, followed by Small CDFIs. For Large CDFIs, the results are distinct: more large CDFIs (44%) saw a decrease in demand between the third quarters of 2008 and 2009 than saw an increase (40%). Figure 29. Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications by Asset Size, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 57, 38, 25) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
79% 58% 44% 40%
Increased Decreased
28% 16%
14%
13%
Small
Medium
No Change
8%
Large
Originations: Originations were up for 63% of Medium CDFIs and for 56% of Large CDFIs, compared to 39% of Small CDFIs. As with demand, 40% of Small CDFIs saw no change in originations. Figure 30. Changes in Number of Loans/Investments Originated by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 57, 38, 25) 70%
63% 56%
60% 50% 40%
40%
39%
Increased
30% 21% 20%
21% 16%
20%
24%
Decreased No Change
10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
23
The annual changes were similar to the quarterly changes for Small and Medium CDFIs. For Large CDFIs, they were distinct, with nearly half experiencing a decrease in originations. Figure 31. Annual Change in Number of Loans/Investments Originated by Asset Size, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 57, 38, 25) 55%
60%
48%
50% 40%
40%
37%
36% Increased
30%
24% 21%
23%
16%
20%
Decreased No Change
10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
Portfolio Quality: Quarterly and annual increases in delinquency are concentrated among Large CDFIs, with significantly more Large CDFIs than Medium or Small CDFIs seeing an increase in delinquency over the third quarter 2008. As with demand and originations, more Small CDFIs are experiencing no change over the quarter or the year. Figure 32. Change in Delinquencies by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 58, 38, 25) 60%
56% 50%
50% 40%
45% 34%
34% Increased
28%
30%
Decreased
21% 20%
16%
16%
No Change
10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
24
Figure 33. Annual Change in Delinquencies by Asset Size, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 57, 38, 25) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
68%
42%
40%
39%
Increased
32% 29%
Decreased
20% 12%
18%
Small
Medium
No Change
Large
In spite of increasing delinquencies, Large CDFIs continue to have the lowest average PAR (7.9%), followed by Medium CDFIs (8.4%) and Small CDFIs (10.6%). Table 7. Average Portfolio at Risk by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 n 50 36 21
Small Medium Large
30-60 days 2.8% 2.6% 2.0%
60-90 days 1.3% 1.1% 0.7%
90+ days 6.4% 4.7% 5.2%
Total Portfolio at Risk 10.6% 8.4% 7.9%
The majority of Large CDFIs (60%) saw an increase in the number of loans in workout, whereas the majority of Small (57%) and Medium (53%) CDFIs saw no change. Figure 34. Changes in Number of Loans/Investments in Workout by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 58, 38, 25) 70% 53%
50% 40%
60%
57%
60%
45% 34%
Increased 28%
30%
No Change
20% 10%
Decreased
12%
9% 3%
0% Small
Medium
Large
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
25
A similar pattern holds true for term extensions. Figure 35. Changes in Number of Loans Given Term Extensions by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 43, 38, 23) 80%
70%
70%
63%
60% 48%
50%
40% 40% 30%
Decreased
29%
26%
Increased
No Change
20% 10%
12%
8%
4%
0% Small
Medium
Large
Most Large CDFIs (60%) increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. Most Small CDFIs (52%) did not change their ratio. Among Medium CDFIs, an equal number (45%) increased as kept it the same. Figure 36. Changes Loan Loss Reserve Ratio by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 58, 38, 25) 70% 60% 60%
52%
50% 40%
45%
45%
36%
Increased 28%
30% 20%
Decreased No Change
12%
11%
12%
Small
Medium
Large
10% 0%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
26
Liquidity: In the third quarter, the majority of Medium and Large CDFIs reported no change in access to capital and a preponderance of Small CDFIs reported no change.
Figure 37. Changes in Access to Capital by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 39, 33, 22) 70%
64%
60%
55%
50% 40% 30%
41% 31% 28%
Increased 27%
23%
18%
20%
14%
Decreased No Change
10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
For Large and Medium CDFIs, the annual changes are similar to the quarterly changes, though flatter. For small CDFIs, the annual change shows the largest portion of CDFIs (40%) experiencing a decline in access to capital. Figure 38. Annual Changes in Access to Capital by Asset Size, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 43, 31, 22) 60%
55% 48%
50% 40% 30%
40% 35% 26%
26%26%
27% 18%
20%
Increased Decreased No Change
10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
27
More (37%) Medium CDFIs experienced a decline in liquidity than other asset sizes. Improvements in liquidity were roughly similar for Small CDFIs (32%) and Medium CDFIs (37%), but less so for Large CDFIs (24%). Figure 39. Changes in Capital Liquidity by Asset Size, 3rd Q2009 (n = 57, 38, 25) 70% 60%
60% 50% 40%
46% 37% 37%
Increased
32%
30%
26%
23%
Decreased
24%
No Change
16%
20% 10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
With respect to annual changes, more than one quarter (27% to 39%) of each asset class had an increase in liquidity. Only in the Medium asset class did more CDFIs experience a decrease (45%) than an increase in liquidity. Figure 40. Annual Change in Capital Liquidity by Asset Size, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 56, 38, 25) 60% 50%
50%
45% 39%
40% 30%
27%
36%
32% 32%
23%
Decreased
16%
20%
Increased
No Change
10% 0% Small
Medium
Large
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
28
B. Outlook for the Next Quarter Most CDFIs in all size categories expect capital liquidity and/or operating difficulties in the next quarter. For Small and Medium CDFIs, the two primary reasons are not having enough capital to meet demand and fewer operating grants to cover operations. For large CDFIs, the two top concerns are loan loss reserves and the cost of borrowed capital. Figure 41. If you expect your CDFI to experience new capital liquidity or operating difficulties in the next quarter, please explain why. (n=42, 26, 14) We won’t have enough capital to meet growing demand.
43% 7% 7%
Bank investors are not renewing our loans.
5%
Bank investors have begun to require that we secure their loans.
We don’t have enough staff to manage problem loans.
19% 14% 35% 43%
We have fewer operating grants available to cover operations.
14% 0%
57%
15%
19%
Our cost of borrowed capital is rising.
50%
50%
Small
50%
Medium Large
26% 14% 24%
We need to increase loan loss reserves to cover problem loans.
35%
64%
21% 15% 14%
Other (please specify): 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Comments provided in ‘Other’ included: “We do not have enough "independent" capital to do deals without bank participation. Our commercial banks are not willing to originate loans on commercial real estate, so we have a large pipeline of projects for which we are seeking bank partners.” “Losses from corporate stabilization and corporate depletion are affecting us.” “Non Bank lenders (Non Profit) are not demanding repayment of our loans due to financial covenant violations.” “The costs of capital will rise because we have received less grant funding this year.”
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
29
In response to market conditions, two-thirds or more of CDFIs in each size category has sought new grant funding. For Small and Medium CDFIs, the next most common response was revising their 2009/10 budget. For Large CDFIs, the next most common response was reducing staff travel and professional development expenses. Table 8. If you expect your CDFI to experience new capital liquidity or operating difficulties in the next quarter, what have you done about it? (n=47, 32, 21) Small Medium Large Looked for new grant funding 68% 72% 67% Revised our 2009/10 budget 45% 41% 29% Reduced staff travel and professional development expenses 34% 38% 52% Reduced loan sizes and/or terms 26% 28% 29% Laid off staff 19% 31% 29% Implemented a hiring freeze 15% 28% 29% Reduced other operating expenses 21% 31% 24% Froze salaries 21% 22% 24% Contracted consultants instead of hiring new staff 17% 13% 24% Created a worst-case, contingency plan budget to plan for dramatic downsizing if it becomes necessary 4% 28% 29% Reduced bonuses 6% 13% 29% Requested loan/investment covenant waivers 6% 22% 24% We have not implemented any new actions in response to these difficulties 11% 6% 10% Reduced salaries 11% 9% 0% Other 9% 13% 0% Requested forbearance from existing lenders/investors 6% 3% 5% Implemented a furlough 2% 9% 0% Note: Percentages do not add up to 100% because respondents were allowed to provide more than one response.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
30
Nearly all CDFIs in all size categories are implementing new business strategies and/or activities in response to changing market conditions. Monitoring borrowers more closely is the most common reponse for all sizes of CDFIs (75% to 100%). Large and Medium CDFIs are also placing an emphasis on adjusting risk ratings and reserves (92% and 68%, respectively), while Small CDFIs are focused on providing additional technical assistance to clients. Figure 42. What new business strategies and/or activities is your organization using to respond to changing market conditions? (n = 51, 37, 24) 75% 84%
Monitoring borrowers more closely Providing additional technical assistance 16%
Conducting an organizational “stress test,” periodic …
16%
Re‐appraising collateral
41% 27%
Adjusting risk ratings and reserves
31%
Tightening credit requirements
31%
Selling loan/investment participations to other …
Other We have not implemented any new strategies
67%
46% 68%
92% Small
46% 42% 33% 38% 38%
Participating in loans with banks or CDFIs
Developing new financing products
100%
59% 54% 58%
Medium Large
12% 32% 17% 25% 32% 38% 6% 8% 8% 8% 0% 0%
0%
20%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
40%
60%
80% 100% 120%
31
IV. RESULTS BY PRIMARY FINANCING SECTOR In this section we provide an analysis for each of the primary financing sectors: Business, Commercial Real Estate, Community Services/Facilities, Consumer, Housing to Individuals, Housing to Organizations, and Microenterprise. In the Business and Housing to Organizations samples, there are a sufficient number of respondents to conduct trend analyses and to breakout these sectors by region. A. Business Twenty-six respondents provide primarily Business financing. See Appendix 7A for complete Business results and Appendix 7H for Business trends. Demand and Originations: Nearly three-fourths (73%) of Business CDFIs saw an increase in the number of financing applications received in the third quarter over the second quarter; even more (77%) saw an increase over the previous year (third quarter 2008). A smaller percentage (54%) of Business CDFIs originated more loans in the third quarter than in the second quarter; on an annual basis, 46% of CDFIs originated more loans in the third quarter 2009 than in the third quarter 2008. Four CDFIs had substantial increases of 51% to 100%. The primary reason for decreases in originations was poor application quality. Figure 43. Business CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2009 (n =26, 26) 80%
73% 54%
60%
% Increase
40%
27% 19%
20%
% Decrease
19%
% No Change
8%
0% Applications
Originations
Figure 44. Business CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=26, 26) 90% 80%
77%
70% 60% 46%
50%
% Increase 35%
40% 30%
19%
20% 10%
19%
% Decrease % No Change
4%
0% Applications
Originations
Trend data are available for ten Business CDFIs. In the third quarter, the percentage of CDFIs experiencing an increase in demand increased over the previous two quarters. Originations dropped sharply, from 70%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
32
of CDFIs reporting more originations in the second quarter to 20% in the third quarter. See Appendix 7H for the complete trend analysis. Portfolio Quality: Forty-two percent of Business CDFIs experienced increases in delinquencies in the third quarter over the second quarter. The same percentage saw delinquencies increase over the previous year. The reasons include: “We have had several major plant closings and unemployment is at 10%+.” “Marginal existing businesses and start-ups are not experiencing the sales growth they anticipated.” “More stressed companies with cash flow issues are taking longer to pay their debt obligations.” Most Business CDFIs held the number of workouts and the number of term extensions constant in the third quarter. At the end of the quarter, Business CDFIs had on average 9.3% portfolio at risk: 2.1% at 30-60 days, 1.5% at 60-90 days, and 5.7% at 90 days or more. Average net charge-offs during the quarter were 0.7%. Nearly half (46%) increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. Figure 45. Business CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n = 26, 26, 26) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
65%
62% 42% 35%
35%
31%
% Increase
23%
Delinquencies
% Decrease 4%
4%
Workouts
Term Extensions
% No Change
The trend in portfolio quality is negative: the percentage of CDFIs reporting an increase in delinquency doubled from 30% in the second quarter to 60% in the third quarter. Average portfolio at risk rose from 4.2% to 6.3%. The trend in workouts and term extensions is a sharp decline, with the percentage of CDFIs reporting an increase in workouts falling from 50% in the first and second quarters to 20% in the third quarter and the percentage reporting an increase in extensions falling steadily from 50% in the first quarter to 10% in the third quarter.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
33
Liquidity: Most Business CDFIs have had no change in access to capital since the second quarter (61%) or the third quarter 2008 (59%). Capital liquidity improved for 42% of CDFIs since the second quarter and for nearly half (46%) since the third quarter 2008. Slightly less than half (48%) are capital-constrained. Figure 46. Business CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 22, 26) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
61% 42% 27%
26%
31% % Increase
13%
% Decrease % No Change
Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Figure 47. Business CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008-3rdQ2009 (n= 22, 26) 70% 59%
60%
46%
50% 40%
35%
30% 20%
18%
% Increase % Decrease
23%
19%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Nearly one-quarter (23%) expect a decline in unrestricted net assets in their current fiscal year. The trend data are different: the % that expect unrestricted net assets to decrease has fallend steadily from 30% in the first quarter to 10% in the third quarter. The next section analyzes differences among Business CDFIs headquartered in the four regions of the country. B. Business CDFIs by Region Business CDFIs are concentrated in three regions, with nine in the Midwest, seven in the Northeast, and eight in the South. Only two Business CDFIs in the West responded to the third quarter survey. We caution the reader to consider this very small sample size when interpreting the results for the West. Portfolio Quality: Increases in delinquencies were concentrated in the Northeast (versus the West in the first quarter). Fifty-seven percent of Business CDFIs in this region reported a rise in their delinquency rates during the first quarter. In the Midwest, the smallest percentage of CDFIs reported an increase in delinquencies (33%); at the same time, the largest percentage reported an increase in the number of workouts (44%).
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
34
Figure 48. Business CDFIs’ Increases in Delinquencies and Workouts by Region, 3rdQ2009 (n =26, 26) 57%
60%
50%
50% 40%
44% 38% 38% 33%
Increase in Delinquencies
29%
30%
Increase in Workouts
20% 10% 0%
0% Midwest Northeast
South
West
Average portfolio at risk ranged widely across the regions. It was lowest in the South (6.1%) and highest in the Midwest (11.8%). (In the first quarter, it was highest in the Northeast and lowest in the West.) Table 9. Business CDFIs’ Average Portfolio Quality by Region, 3rd Q2009 Midwest Northeast South
West
30-60 days
1.2%
3.1%
1.9%
3.9%
60-90 days
0.3%
1.4%
2.7%
2.8%
90+ days
10.2%
5.3%
1.5%
3.1%
Total Portfolio at Risk
11.8%
9.8%
6.1%
9.8%
Net Charge-offs
0.2%
1.5%
0.3%
2.0%
Liquidity: Capital constraints are significantly more severe in the West than in other regions. Half of the CDFIs in the West report that their access to capital decreased in the third quarter. An equal percentage reported a drop in capital liquidity. By comparison, responses to both of these questions were less than 30% for all other regions. Figure 49. Business CDFIs’ Decreases in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity by Region, 3rdQ2009 (n =23, 26) 60% 50% 50%
50% 40% Decrease in Access to Capital
29%
30%
25%
22%
Decrease in Capital Liquidity
17%
20% 13%
10% 0%
0% Midwest Northeast
South
West
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
35
C. Commercial Real Estate Eight survey respondents provide primarily Commercial Real Estate financing. With this small sample size, survey results may not be representative of the broader population of Commercial Real Estate CDFIs. See Appendix 7B for the complete results. Demand and Originations: A higher percentage of Commercial Real Estate CDFIs (75%) saw an increase in financing applications than any other sector. The same percentage reported an increase over the second quarter as well as a year ago. Only 38% increased originations over the second quarter, and a full 63% decreased originations compared to third quarter 2008. Figure 50. Commercial Real Estate CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2009 (n = 8, 8) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
75%
38% 25%
38%
% Increase % Decrease
25%
% No Change 0% Applications
Originations
Figure 51. Commercial Real Estate CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=8, 8) 80%
75%
70%
63%
60% 50%
% Increase
40% 30%
25%
20% 10%
% Decrease
25% 13%
% No Change
0%
0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
36
Portfolio Quality: Sixty-three percent of Commercial Real Estate CDFIs reported an increase in delinquencies in the third quarter over the second quarter; even more, 75%, reported an increase over the third quarter 2008. Sixty-three percent reported an increase in the number of loans in workout since the second quarter. Average PAR was 12.2%, with nearly all (11.3%) 90 days or more past due. Figure 52. Commercial Real Estate CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rdQ2009 (n = 8, 8, 8) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
63%
63%
63%
38%
38% % Increase
25%
% Decrease
13%
Delinquencies
0%
0%
Workouts
Term Extensions
% No Change
Liquidity: Of the CDFIs that attempted to access new or renewal capital, 50%reported decreased access. At the same time, 50% of CDFIs reported an increase in capital liquidity. The results are somewhat similar for the change over the previous year. More than half (57%) of Commercial Real Estate CDFIs expect a decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year. Figure 53. Commercial Real Estate CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 8, 8 ) 60% 50%
50%
50% 38%
40%
38% % Increase
30%
% Decrease 20%
13%
13%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
37
Figure 54. Commercial Real Estate CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008-3rdQ2009 (n=7, 8) 60% 50% 50%
43% 43% 38%
40%
% Increase
30%
% Decrease 20%
14%
13%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
38
D. Community Services/Facilities Five survey respondents provide primarily Community Services/Facilities financing. With this small sample size, survey results may not be representative of the broader population of Community Services/Facilities CDFIs. See Appendix 7C for the complete results. Demand and Originations: Demand increased for 48% of Community Services/Facilities CDFIs in the third quarter over the second quarter, and for 60% of CDFIs over the previous year. Originations increased for 80% of CDFIs compared to both the second quarter 2009 and the third quarter 2008, with two of the five CDFIs reporting increases of 51% to 100%. Figure 55. Community Services/Facilities CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2009 (n = 5, 5 ) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
80%
48% 40% % Increase 20%
20%
% Decrease % No Change
0% Applications
Originations
Figure 56. Community Services/Facilities CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=5, 5) 90%
80%
80% 70%
60%
60% 50%
% Increase
40%
% Decrease
30%
20% 20%
20%
20% 10%
% No Change
0%
0% Applications
Originations
Portfolio Quality: Sixty percent of Community Services/Facilities CDFIs reported an increase in delinquencies and 40% reported a decrease. Two of the three CDFIs reporting an increase experienced an increase of 51% - 100%. Average portfolio at risk was 6.6%, with the 90 days plus category smaller than the 31-60 day category for the first time since the fourth quarter 2008 when these data were first collected (2.5% vs. 3.6%).
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
39
Eighty percent reported an increase in the number of loans in workout. Figure 57. Community Services/Facilities CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rdQ2009 (n = 5, 5, 5) 100% 80% 60%
80% 60% 40%
40%
40%
40% 20%
20%
0%
20%
% Decrease
0%
% No Change
0% Delinquencies
% Increase
Workouts
Term Extensions
Liquidity: For the Community Services/Facilities CDFIs that attempted to access new or renewal capital, all reported no change in access compared to the second quarter; 40% reported an increase in access over the third quarter 2008. At the same time, capital liquidity decreased for 60% of CDFIs compared to the second quarter but increased for 40% of CDFIs over one year earlier. Figure 58. Community Services/Facilities CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2009 (n = 5, 5) 120%
100%
100% 80%
60%
60%
40%
40% 20%
% Increase % Decrease
0% 0%
0%
% No Change
0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
40
Figure 59. Community Services/Facilities CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008-3rdQ2009 (n = 5, 5) 70% 60% 60% 50% 40%
40%
40%
40%
% Increase % Decrease
30% 20% 20%
% No Change
10% 0% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
41
E. Consumer Fourteen CDFIs, 10 credit unions and four loan funds, provide primarily consumer finance. See Appendix 7D for complete results. Demand and Originations: In the third quarter, there was an even split between CDFIs that had an increase in demand and those that had no change; none experienced a decrease in demand. Fifty percent increased their originations in the third quarter over the second quarter; the increase is smaller (36%) over a year ago. Figure 60. Consumer CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2009 (n =14, 14) 60%
50%
50%
50%
50% 40% 29%
30%
21%
% Increase
20% 10%
% Decrease % No Change
0%
0% Applications
Originations
Figure 61. Consumer CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=14, 14) 60%
57%
50% 40%
36% 36% 28%
30%
% Increase % Decrease
21% 21% 20%
% No Change
10% 0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
42
Portfolio Quality: Delinquency remained stable for 43% of Consumer CDFIs and increased for 36%. Workouts increased for 43% of CDFIs but extensions were stable for the majority (64%). Average portfolio at risk was 8.2% (2.3% at 31-60 days, 1.5% at 61-90 days, and 4.4% at 90 plus days). Figure 62. Consumer CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n =14, 14, 14 ) 70%
64%
60% 50% 40% 30%
43%
43%
36%
% Increase 29%
% Decrease
21%
20%
% No Change
14% 14% 7%
10% 0% Delinquencies
Workouts
Term Extensions
Liquidity: Access to capital increased for 40% of CDFIs over the second quarter and 50% over one year ago. Capital liquidity did not change from the second quarter for 79% of CDFIs; compared to one year ago, 50% of CDFIs had no change in capital liquidity. Figure 63. Consumer CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n =4, 14 ) 100% 79%
80% 60% 40%
40%
% Increase
40%
21%
20% 20% 0%
% Decrease % No Change
0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
43
Figure 64. Consumer CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008 - 3rdQ2009 (n=6, 14) 60% 50%
50%
50% 40%
33% 29%
30% 21% 20%
17%
% Increase % Decrease % No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
More than one-third (36%) of Consumer CDFIs expect to have a decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
44
F. Housing to Individuals Seventeen respondents provide primarily Housing to Individuals. See Appendix 7E for complete results. Demand and Originations: Compared to last quarter, fewer than half (41%) experienced an increase in financing applications; compared to one year ago, a much larger percentage (59%) saw an increase. Originations increased for 44% over the second quarter and for more than half (53%) over one year earlier. Figure 65. Housing to Individuals CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2009 (n =17, 16) 50%
44%
41% 40% 30%
31%
29% 29%
25% % Increase
20%
% Decrease
10%
% No Change
0% Applications
Originations
Figure 66. Housing to Individuals CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=17, 17) 70% 60%
59% 53%
50% 40%
% Increase 29%
30% 20%
% Decrease
24% 18%
18%
% No Change
10% 0% Applications
Originations
Portfolio Quality: Nearly half (47%) of Housing to Individuals CDFIs reported increases in delinquencies in the third quarter. Average portfolio at risk was 12%, with more than half of this 90 days or more past due (2.9% at 30-60 days, 1.3% at 60-90 days, and 7.5% at 90 days or more).
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
45
Workouts and term extension held steady for most CDFIs (59% and 76%, respectively. Figure 67. Housing to Individuals CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n =17, 17, 17) 76%
80% 70%
59%
60% 50%
47% 41%
% Increase
35%
40% 30% 20%
% Decrease
24%
% No Change
18%
10%
0%
0%
Workouts
Term Extensions
0% Delinquencies
Liquidity: Housing to Individuals CDFIs are facing liquidity challenges. Forty-three percent reported decreases in liquidity, with 15% reporting a decline of at least 50%. Sixty-two percent reported that they are capital-constrained. Of the CDFIs that tried to access new capital, 43% reported increased difficulties compared to the second quarter and 44% reported increased difficulties compared to one year earlier. Changes in capital liquidity are split among CDFIs that experiences increases, decreases and no change over the second quarter and over the previous year. Figure 68. Housing to Individuals CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n=14, 17 ) 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
43% 36%
35% 35% 29%
21%
% Increase % Decrease % No Change
Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
46
Figure 69. Housing to Individuals CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008-3rdQ2009 (n=16, 17) 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
44% 38%
35% 35% 29% % Increase
19%
% Decrease % No Change
Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
One-quarter of Housing to Individuals CDFIs expects a loss in unrestricted net assets in their current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
47
G. Housing to Organizations Twenty-nine CDFIs provide primarily Housing to Organizations. Of these, 16 have responded to the three most recent surveys and we use this subset to report trends. See Appendix 7F for the complete results for all Housing to Organizations CDFIs and Appendix 7I for the complete trend results. Demand: Fewer than half (44%) of the Housing to Organizations CDFIs saw an increase in financing requests in the third quarter over the second quarter and 24% saw a decline. Four CDFIs saw increases of 50% or more. Comparing the third quarter 2009 to the third quarter 2008, an equal number (39%) of CDFIs have seen an increase as has seen a decrease in financing applications. The trend is a decline, with 63% experiencing an increase in demand in the first quarter to 25% in the third quarter. Originations likewise are mixed: whereas 41% increased their originations over the second quarter, almost as many (39%) had fewer originations in the third quarter 2009 than in the third quarter 2008. Several experienced significant changes: three CDFIs had decreases of 51% to 100%, and four had increases of more than 50%. The trend in originations is uneven but appears to be a general increase in the percentage of CDFIs increasing originations each quarter (13% in the first quarter, 56% in the second, 38% in the third). Figure 70. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2009 (n =29, 29) 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
44%
41%
38%
31% 24%
% Increase
21%
% Decrease % No Change
Applications
Originations
Figure 71. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=28, 28) 45% 40%
39%
39% 39%
36%
35% 30% 25%
25% % Increase
21%
20%
% Decrease
15%
% No Change
10% 5% 0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
48
Portfolio Quality: More than half (52%) of Housing to Organizations CDFIs saw no change in delinquency over the second quarter and a smaller number (36%) saw no change over the third quarter 2008. Average portfolio at risk was 7.3% (1.7% at 30-60 days, 0.4% at 60-90 days, and 7.3% at 90 days or more). Net charge offs were 0.1% in the third quarter. Close to half (45%) increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. Like originations, the trend in delinquency is uneven, with the number of CDFIs reporting no change dropping in the second quarter and rising in the third (50% in the first quarter, 44% in the second, 56% in the third). Change in workouts and term extensions are stabilizing, with 45% of CDFIs reporting no change in the number of workouts and 54% reporting no change in the number of term extensions given. Figure 72. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rdQ2009 (n= 29, 29, 28 ) 60%
54%
52% 50%
45% 38%
40% 30%
29%
28%
% Decrease
21% 20%
% Increase
17%
18%
Workouts
Term Extensions
% No Change
10% 0% Delinquencies
Across the entire sample of 121 CDFIs that responded to the third quarter survey, forty-three CDFIs finance housing development. Of these, 58% reported that their housing development loans were performing. Among the 42% that reported non-performing housing development loans, the primary reasons reported were challenges finding permanent take out financing (42%) and changes in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit market (30%).
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
49
Liquidity: A majority of Housing to Organizations CDFIs (61%) report that they are capital-constrained. Of those that tried to access new or renewal capital in the third quarter, half report that their access to capital has not changed from the second quarter and 36% report that it has not changed from one year ago. Capital liquidity remained stable for 43% of CDFIs when compared to the second quarter; however, compared to the third quarter 2008, 39% report a decrease in liquidity. Figure 73. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2009 (n=26, 28) 60% 50% 50%
43%
40% 30%
32% 27%
25%
23%
% Increase
20%
% Decrease
10%
% No Change
0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Figure 74. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008-3rdQ2009 (n=25, 28) 45% 40% 35%
39%
36% 32% 32%
30%
29%
32%
25%
% Increase
20%
% Decrease
15%
% No Change
10% 5% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
More than one-quarter (29%) of Housing to Organizations CDFIs expect a decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year. The trend is an increase, from 13% in the first quarter to 25% in the third quarter. The primary reasons were not receiving a CDFI Fund award and charge offs. The next section analyzes differences among Housing to Organizations CDFIs headquartered in the four regions of the country. H. Housing to Organizations by Region The 29 Housing to Organizations CDFIs are headquartered in all four regions, with ten in the Northeast, nine in the South, and five in both the Midwest and the West.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
50
Portfolio Quality: Delinquency rose for many more Housing to Organizations CDFIs in the Midwest (60%) than in any other region (30% or less). At the same time, far fewer Midwest CDFIs (20%) increased the number of workouts; in all other regions the figure was atleast double (40% to 44%). Figure 75. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Increases in Delinquencies and Workouts by Region, 3rd Q2009 (n=29, 29, 28 ) 70% 60% 60% 50%
44% 40%
40%
40% Increase in Delinquencies
30% 30% 20%
20%
Increase in Workouts
20% 11% 10% 0% Midwest Northeast
South
West
Portfolio at risk was highest in the South (12.3%) and more than double any other region. On a positive note, CDFIs in the South had negative net charge offs, meaning recoveries exceeded charge offs in the third quarter. Table 10. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Average Portfolio Quality by Region, 3rd Q2009 Midwest Northeast South West 30-60 days
1.7%
0.7%
3.4%
0.7%
60-90 days
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.8%
90+ days
3.7%
3.5%
8.5%
4.0%
Total Portfolio at Risk
5.5%
4.4%
12.3%
5.5%
Net Charge-offs
0.0%
0.2%
-0.1%
0.5%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
51
Liquidity: Among CDFIs that tried to access new or renewal capital in the third quarter, those in the South and Midwest had the most difficulty. Capital liquidity fell for more than half (56%) of CDFIs in the South, far more than in any other region. Figure 76. Housing to Organizations CDFIs’ Decreases in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2009 (n =28, 28) 60%
56%
50% 40% 30%
25%
25%
20% 20%
Decrease in Access to Capital Decrease in Capital Liquidity
20% 11% 10% 10% 0% 0% Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
52
I. Microenterprise Thirteen CDFIs that provide primarily Microenterprise financing completed the survey. The complete results for this group of CDFIs are found in Appendix 7G. Demand and Originations: Sixty-nine percent of Microenterprise CDFIs experienced increased demand in the third quarter over the second quarter; even more (77%) experienced increased demand over the third quarter 2008. Originations also increased for a majority of CDFIs: 62% reported increases over the second quarter and 69% reported increases over the third quarter 2008 Figure 77. Microenterprise CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2009 (n = 13, 13) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
69%
62%
% Increase
23% 15% 15%
15%
% Decrease % No Change
Applications
Originations
Figure 78. Microenterprise CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n=13, 13) 90% 80%
77% 69%
70% 60% 50%
% Increase
40% 30%
% Decrease 23% 15% 15%
20% 10%
% No Change
0%
0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
53
Portfolio Quality: Delinquency rates increased for 62% Microenterprise CDFIs in the third quarter. An equal percentage reported increases over third quarter 2008 delinquency rates. An equal percentage of CDFIs reported increases in the number of loans in workout while 46% reported increases in extensions. Average portfolio at risk was 10.6%, with half of this in the 90 plus day category (3.3% at 30-60 days, 2.1% at 60-90 days, and 5.3% at 90 days or more). Nearly half (46%) increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. Figure 79. Microenterprise CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rdQ2009 (n =13, 13, 13) 70%
62%
62%
60%
54% 46%
50% 40% 30% 20%
% Increase
31%
% Decrease
23%
% No Change
15% 8%
10%
0% 0% Delinquencies
Workouts
Term Extensions
Liquidity: Fewer than half (38%) of Microenterprise CDFIs are capital-constrained. Of those that tried to access new or renewal capital in the third quarter, 50% reported no change in their ability to access capital over the second quarter; 44% reported an increase in their ability to access capital over the third quarter 2008. In terms of capital liquidity, 28% reported that their liquidity had increased since the second quarter and more than half (54%) reported no change in liquidity over the third quarter 2008. Figure 80. Microenterprise CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2009 (n = 8, 13) 60% 50% 50% 38%
40% 30%
25% 25%
38% 23%
% Increase
20%
% Decrease
10%
% No Change
0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
54
Figure 81. Microenterprise CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008 - 3rdQ2009 (n=9, 13) 60% 50%
54% 44%
40% 30%
33%
31%
22%
20%
% Increase % Decrease
15%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
More than one-third (38%) of Microenterprise CDFIs expect a loss in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
55
V. RESULTS BY REGION This section presents results for each region. Regional results may be influenced by the distribution of CDFIs in each primary financing sector: regions with a heavy concentration of microenterprise CDFIs may have higher delinquency rates in part because microenterprise portfolios tend to have higher delinquency rates than other portfolios due to their higher risk profile. For each region, we provide the percentage of CDFIs in each primary financing sector. See Appendix 8 for more results by region, including trend analysis. A. Midwest The 27 Midwest CDFIs that responded to the survey are distributed among all sectors but concentrated in Business.
Community Services/Facilitie s
Consumer
Housing to Individuals
Housing to Organizations
Microenterprise
Other
Total
# of CDFIs % of Region
Commercial Real Estate
Type of Financing
Business
Table 11. Sectoral Composition of Midwest CDFIs, 3rd Q2009
9
2
1
2
4
5
3
1
27
33%
7%
4%
7%
15%
19%
11%
4%
100%
Demand and Originations: Two-thirds (67%) of Midwest CDFIs received more financing applications in the third quarter than in the second quarter, more than in any other region; CDFIs in the West followed with 65%. Fifty-nine percent originated more loans. Figure 82. Midwest CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2009 (n = 27, 27) 70%
67% 59%
60% 50% 40%
30%
30% 20%
15%
19%
% Increase % Decrease
11%
10%
% No Change
0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
56
The change in demand over the third quarter 2008 was more greater, with 73% of CDFIs experiencing an increase in applications. The annual change in originations was smaller, with 50% of CDFIs increasing the number of originations over the third quarter 2008. Figure 83. Midwest CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 – 3rd Q2009 (n = 26, 26) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
73% 50% % Increase 27% 12%
% Decrease
23%
15%
% No Change
Applications
Originations
Portfolio Quality: Delinquencies increased for 44% of Midwest CDFIs. At the end of the quarter, the average PAR had risen to 9.8% (2.2% at 30-60 days, 0.7% at 60-90 days, and 6.9% at 90 days or more), up from 8.7% at the end of the second quarter. Third quarter net charge-offs were 0.7%. Forty-four percent of Midwest CDFIs had more loans/investments in workout and 35% granted more term extensions. Figure 84. Midwest CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n = 27, 27, 26) 70%
62%
60% 50% 40%
44%
44%
48%
37%
35%
30% 20%
% Increase
19%
% Decrease 7%
10%
4%
% No Change
0% Delinquencies
Workouts
Term Extensions
Thirty-three percent of Midwest CDFIfs increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter, a lower percentage than any other region.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
57
Liquidity: The percentage of Midwest CDFIs reporting that they are capital-constrained is comparable to other regions: 50% in the Midwest versus 50% to 52% in other regions. Twenty-one percent of Midwest CDFIs reported an increase in their ability to access new or renewal capital compared to 7% to 33% in other regions; 21% reported a decrease in access to capital, which is comparable to the Northeast and South, but lower than the West (40%). Figure 85. Midwest CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 27, 26) 70% 58%
60%
46%
50% 40% 30%
% Increase
31% 23%
21% 21%
% Decrease % No Change
20% 10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Compared to a year ago, more CDFIs are better off, with 30% reporting an increase in access to capital and 58% reporting an increase in liquidity. Figure 86. Midwest CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008-3rd Q2009 (n = 26, 26) 70% 58%
60% 48%
50% 40% 30%
% Increase
30% 22%
27%
% Decrease 15%
20%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
More than one-third (35%) of Midwest CDFIs anticipate a decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
58
B. Northeast The 31 Northeast CDFIs are concentrated in Housing to Organizations and Business.
4 13%
2 6%
2 6%
Total
10 32%
Other*
4 13%
Microenterprise
Housing to Organizations
7 1 1 23% 3% 3% * Two CDFIs did not provide a primary financing category.
Housing to Individuals
# of CDFIs % of Region
Consumer
Community Services/Facilities
Commercial Real Estate
Type of Financing
Business
Table 12. Sectoral Composition of Northeast CDFIs, 3rd Q2009
31 100%
Demand and Originations: Demand increased for 48% of Northeast CDFIs in the third quarter over the second quarter; demand increased for even more CDFIs (61%) compared to the third quarter 2008. Nearly half (48%) originated more loans/investments in the third quarter over the second quarter. Compared to a year ago, the results are mixed: equal percentages (35%0 of CDFIs experienced an increase as a decrease in originations over the third quarter 2008. Figure 87. Northeast CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2009 (n = 31, 31) 60% 50%
48%
48%
40%
32%
30% 20%
29% % Increase
23%
19%
% Decrease % No Change
10% 0% Applications
Originations
Figure 88. Northeast CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 - 3rd Q2009 (n = 31, 31) 70%
61%
60% 50% 35% 35%
40% 30% 20%
29% 23% 16%
% Increase % Decrease % No Change
10% 0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
59
Portfolio Quality: Nearly one-half (45%) of CDFIs in the Northeast experienced an increase in delinquency in the third quarter over the second quarter; fewer (35%) reported an increase over the third quarter 2008, up from only 28% in the second quarter. Workouts were up for 42% of CDFIs while more than half (55%) held them constant. Term extensions were constant for nearly three-fourths (71%) of CDFIs. On average, portfolio at risk was 9.7% (3.2% at 30-60 days, 1.3% at 60-90 days, and 5.1% at 90 days or more), down from 12.3% in the second quarter. Thirty-nine percent of CDFIs increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. Figure 89. Northeast CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n = 31, 31, 31) 80%
71%
70% 55%
60% 50%
45%
42%
42%
40%
% Increase
30% 20%
% Decrease
19% 13%
10%
10%
% No Change
3%
0% Delinquencies
Workouts
Term Extensions
Liquidity: Slightly more than half (52%) of Northeast CDFIs reported being capital constrained. (52% for the third quarter versus 58% for the second quarter). For those CDFIs that tried to access new or renewal 52% reported no change in their ability to access capital over the second quarter; 44% reported no change over the third quarter 2008. Liquidity remained constant for 42% of CDFIs over the second quarter and slightly more (45%) over the previous year. Figure 90. Northeast CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 30, 31) 60%
52%
50%
42%
40% 30%
35% 24% 24%
% Increase 23%
20% 10%
% Decrease
% No Change
0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
60
Figure 91. Northeast CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rdQ2008 - 3rd Q2009 (n = 30, 31) 50% 40% 30%
45%
44% 32% 24%
29%
26%
% Increase % Decrease
20%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Nearly one-quarter (24%) anticipate a decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
61
C. South The 40 CDFIs headquartered in the South (including one CDFI in Puerto Rico) cover all eight primary financing sectors. They have concentrations in Housing to Organizations and Business.
# of CDFIs
8
3
2
% of Region 20% 8% 5% * Six CDFIs did not provide a primary financing category.
Total
Other*
Microenterprise
Housing to Organizations
Housing to Individuals
Consumer
Commercial Real Estate
Business
Type of Financing
Community Services/Facilities
Table 13. Sectoral Composition of South CDFIs, 3rd Q2009
4
5
9
3
6
40
10%
13%
23%
8%
15%
100%
Demand and Originations: More than half (53%) of CDFIs in the South received more financing applications in the third quarter than in the second quarter; 58% received more than one year earlier. Originations were up for nearly half (46%) of CDFIs over the second quarter, and slightly more (48%) over the third quarter 2008. Figure 92. South CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2009 (n = 40, 39) 60%
53% 46%
50% 40%
36%
40% 30%
% Increase 18%
20% 10%
% Decrease % No Change
8%
0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
62
Figure 93. South CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2008 - 3rd Q2009 (n = 40, 39) 70% 60%
58% 48%
50%
35%
40%
% Increase
25%
30%
% Decrease
18%
18%
Applications
Originations
20%
% No Change
10% 0%
Portfolio Quality: Portfolio quality did not change in the third quarter for 45% of CDFIs in the South. Compared to the third quarter 2008, portfolio quality improved for half of the CDFIs. At the end of the third quarter, average portfolio at risk was 10.8% (2.7% at 30-60 days, 1.3% at 60-90 days, and 6.7% at 90 days or more). Third quarter net charge-offs were 0.6%. Forty-five percent of CDFIs increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. The number of loans/investments in workout was stable for 48% of CDFIs. The number of term extensions granted was stable for 58%. Figure 94. South CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n = 40, 40, 40) 70% 58%
60% 45%
50% 40%
48% 43% 38%
35%
% Increase
30% 20%
% Decrease
20% 10% 5%
10% 0% Delinquencies
Workouts
Term Extensions
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
63
Liquidity: Half of CDFIs in the South report being capital-constrained. For 43% of those CDFIs that tried to access new or renewal capital in the third quarter, their ability to access capital did not change over the second quarter. Compared to a year earlier, equal percentages (35%) reported a decrease in ability to access capital and no change in access. Capital liquidity remained constant for 40% of CDFIs over the second quarter and 41% over the third quarter 2008. Figure 95. South CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 40, 40) 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
43% 33%
40% 33% 28%
23%
% Increase % Decrease % No Change
Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Figure 96. South CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2008 - 3rd Q2009 (n = 40, 39) 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
41% 36%
35% 35% 29% 23%
% Increase % Decrease % No Change
Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Nearly one-third (32%) of CDFIs in the South expect a loss in unrestricted net assets in their current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
64
D. West The 23 respondents based in the West are concentrated in Housing to Organizations and Microenterprise.
Community Services/ Facilities
Consumer
Housing to Individuals
Housing to Organizations
Microenterprise
Other
Total
# of CDFIs % of Region
Commercial Real Estate
Type of Financing
Business
Table 14. Sectoral Composition of CDFIs in the West, 3rd Q2009
2
2
1
4
4
5
5
0
23
9%
9%
4%
17%
17%
22%
22%
0%
100%
Demand: Nearly two-thirds (65%) of CDFIs in the West received more financing applications in the third quarter than in the second quarter; more than half (52%) received more compared to the third quarter 2008. Originations were up for neraly half (48%) of CDFIs in the third quarter over the second quarter. Compared to one year earlier, originations were up for 35% of CDFIs and down for the same percentage. Figure 97. West CDFIs’ Changes in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rd Q2009 (n = 23, 23) 70%
65%
60% 48%
50%
% Increase
40% 26%
30%
26% 26%
% Decrease
20% % No Change
9%
10% 0%
Applications
Originations
Figure 98. West CDFIs’ Annual Change in Number of Financing Applications and Originations, 3rdQ2008 - 3rd Q2009 (n = 23, 23) 60%
52%
50% 40%
35% 35% 30%
30%
30% 20%
% Increase % Decrease
17%
% No Change
10% 0% Applications
Originations
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
65
Portfolio Quality: Delinquency rates were higher than second quarter rates for 48% of CDFIs. Caompared to a year ago, delinquency rates were up for even more CDFIs (52%). Average portfolio at risk was 5.9% ( 1.9% at 30-60 days, 1.1% at 60-90 days, and 2.9% at 90 days or more). Third quarter net charge-offs were 1.1%. Sixty-one percent of CDFIs increased their loan loss reserve ratio in the third quarter. Loans/investments in workout and term extensions remained stable for 48% and 57% of CDFIs, respectively. Figure 99. West CDFIs’ Changes in Delinquencies, Workouts, and Term Extensions, 3rd Q2009 (n = 23, 23, 23) 57%
60% 50%
48%
48% 43%
40%
% Increase
35% 30%
% Decrease
30% 22%
% No Change
20% 10%
9%
9%
Workouts
Term Extensions
0% Delinquencies
Liquidity: Half of CDFIs in the West report that they are capital-constrained. Among those seeking new or renewal capital in the third quarter, 53% saw no change in ability to access capital over the previous quarter; the same was true compared to the third quarter 2008. Capital liquidity remained at second quarter levels for 43% of CDFIs. Compared to a year earlier, liquidity was lower for 39% of CDFIs. Figure 100. West CDFIs’ Changes in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2009 (n = 21, 23) 60%
53%
50%
43%
40% 40% 30% 26%
30%
% Decrease
20% 10%
% Increase
7%
% No Change
0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
66
Figure 101. West CDFIs’ Annual Change in Access to Capital and Capital Liquidity, 3rd Q2008 - 3rd Q2009 (n = 22, 23) 60%
53%
50% 39%
40%
35% 29%
30% 20%
26%
% Increase % Decrease
18%
% No Change
10% 0% Access to Capital
Capital Liquidity
Twenty-seven percent of CDFIs in the West expect a decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
67
Appendix 1. Definitions A.
Financing Sectors
Business: Business financing includes financing to for-profit and non-profit businesses that have more than five employees OR of financing in an amount greater than $25,000 for the purpose of expansion, working capital, equipment purchase/rental. Financing for housing and community facilities/services (including childcare, health care and elder care, home-based or otherwise) should not be included here but with the Housing or Community Services sector. Commercial Real Estate: Business financing includes financing for construction, rehabilitation, acquisition or expansion of non-residential property used for office, retail, or industrial purposes. Community Services: Community Services financing includes financing to community service organizations such as human and social service agencies, advocacy organizations, cultural/religious organizations, health care providers, and child care/education providers, regardless of tax status. Uses include acquisition, construction, renovation, leasehold improvement, and expansion loans as well as working capital loans and lines of credit. Financing for any type of residential space should not be included in this category, but with Housing. Consumer: Consumer includes all personal (secured and unsecured) loans to individuals for health, education, emergency, debt consolidation, transportation, and consumer purposes. To the extent possible, personal loans for business should be identified as microenterprise or business and personal loans for home improvement or repair should be classified as housing -individuals. Housing - Organizations: Housing financing to organizations includes all housing financing to organizations such as predevelopment, acquisition, construction, renovation, lines of credit, working capital, and mortgage loans to support the development of rental housing, service-enriched housing, transitional housing, and/or residential housing. Housing - Individuals: Housing financing to individuals includes loans to individuals to support homeownership and home improvement. Home equity loans should not be included here unless the purpose of the home equity loan is to finance housing-related activities (e.g. home repair, purchase of another home.) All other home equity loans should be classified based upon the purpose of the loan (e.g. a home equity loan that helps the borrower start or expand a business would be classified under Business, a home equity loan that is used to pay for a child's college tuition would be classified under Consumer.) Microenterprise: Microenterprise financing includes financing to for-profit and non-profit businesses that have five or fewer employees (including proprietor), and with a maximum loan/investment of $35,000. This financing may be for the purpose of start up, expansion, working capital, equipment purchase/rental or commercial real estate development or improvement. To the extent possible, financing for housing and community facilities/services (including childcare, home, health care and elder care, home-based or otherwise) should not be included here but with the Housing or Community Services sector. Other: Other includes any activities not covered in the sectors defined here (includes financing to other CDFIs).
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
68
B. Regions and Divisions Regions and divisions are defined by the Census Bureau, with the exception of Puerto Rico. In this report, Puerto Rico is included in the South region (South Atlantic Division). Midwest Region (12 states) East North Central Division: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin West North Central Division: Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota Northeast Region (9 states) New England Division: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont Middle Atlantic Division: New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania South Region (17 states) South Atlantic Division: Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and Puerto Rico. East South Central Division: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee West South Central Division: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas West Region (13 states) Mountain: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming Pacific Division: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington C. Asset Categories Small: Less than $10 million in assets Medium: $10 million to $50 million in assets Large: Greater than $50 million in assets
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
69
Appendix 2. Changes in Survey Questions over Time Asset Size – We began collecting asset size in the 1st Q2009 survey. For the 4th Q2008 survey assets size is estimated based on portfolio outstanding and the industry average ratio of portfolio outstanding to total assets. For 3rd Q2008, asset size is not estimated. Change Over Year – In 3rd Q2009, we added five questions on changes over the previous year (financing applications received, originations, delinquency, access to capital, and capital liquidity). Charge-offs – We began collecting charge-offs in 4th Q2008. Charge-offs are gross in 4th Q2008; they are net of recoveries in the following quarters. Expected Change in Portfolio Quality – The 4th Q2008 responses add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
70
Appendix 3. Survey Respondents – All Respondents, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
121
128
106
118
67
2%
2%
3%
1%
0%
Credit Unions
12%
9%
6%
5%
7%
Loan Funds
84%
86%
87%
92%
91%
1%
3%
5%
3%
1%
114
128
102
118
68
Type
n=
Banks
Venture Funds Financing Sector
n=
Business
3Q08
23%
26%
32%
23%
26%
Commercial Real Estate
7%
2%
6%
2%
0%
Community Services
4%
11%
9%
6%
7%
12%
6%
3%
5%
0%
15%
15%
13%
15%
13%
25%
22%
22%
27%
26%
Microenterprise
11%
16%
12%
19%
0%
Multiple/Other
2%
2%
4%
3%
26%
114
128
102
118
69
Primarily Rural
27%
32%
29%
28%
25%
Primarily Urban
54%
50%
53%
52%
36%
Equally Rural/Urban
19%
18%
18%
20%
39%
121
128
106
118
68
Midwest
22%
23%
22%
19%
31%
Northeast
26%
28%
26%
30%
34%
South
33%
28%
30%
26%
10%
West
19%
21%
22%
25%
25%
121
128
106
114*
NR
Less than $10MM
48%
48%
42%
54%
NR
$10MM-50MM
31%
35%
36%
30%
NR
More than $50MM
21%
17%
22%
17%
NR
Consumer Housing to Individuals Housing to Organizations
Urban/Rural Market
Region
Asset Size
n=
n=
n=
* Asset Size was reported beginning with the 1stQ09 survey. In the 4thQ08 survey, portfolio outstanding was used to estimate asset size. Size was not reported in the 3rdQ08 survey.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
71
Appendix 4. Survey Respondents – Trend Sample, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Trend Analysis Respondents includes only those CDFIs that responded to all of the three most recent surveys.
Trend Analysis Respondents Type
n=
47
Banks
4%
Credit Unions
2%
Loan Funds
94%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
Business
47 21%
Commercial Real Estate
9%
Community Services
9%
Consumer
2%
Housing to Individuals Housing to Organizations
11% 34%
Microenterprise
11%
Multiple/Other
4%
Urban/Rural Market
n=
47
Primarily Rural
21%
Primarily Urban
55%
Equally Rural/Urban
23%
Region
n=
47
Midwest
23%
Northeast
28%
South
34%
West
15%
Asset Size
n=
47
Less than $10MM
30%
$10MM-50MM
38%
More than $50MM
32%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
72
Appendix 5. Results for All Respondents, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 Unless otherwise noted, all increased, decreased, and no change responses measure the change over the previous quarter. In the third quarter 2009, five new questions were added to the survey to measure the change over the previous year. These are noted in the table. NR = No Response due to the question not being asked in that quarter. 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
121
126
104
116
68
Increased
57%
60%
59%
63%
51%
Decreased
16%
16%
17%
19%
19%
No Change
27%
25%
24%
18%
30%
120
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
61%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
20%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
19%
NR
NR
NR
NR
120
127
106
115
NR
Increased
50%
51%
33%
48%
NR
Decreased
21%
16%
34%
30%
NR
No Change
29%
33%
33%
23%
NR
120
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
43%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
28%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
30%
NR
NR
NR
NR
107
115
106
105
NR
31-60 days
2.6%
3.1%
2.7%
2.7%
NR
61-90 days
1.1%
1.5%
1.8%
1.7%
NR
90+ days
5.6%
6.0%
4.8%
6.7%
NR
Total
9.3%
10.6%
9.2%
11.1%
NR
Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
Portfolio-at-Risk*
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
n=
n=
n=
n=
n=
104
107
98
104
NR
0.8%
1.1%
0.4%
1.7%
NR
121
126
105
116
68
Increased
42%
32%
33%
52%
38%
Decreased
20%
30%
20%
9%
14%
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
No Change 38% 38% 47% 39% 48% * The 2ndQ09 portfolio-at-risk figures in this table do not match the analysis in Section II of the report because outliers are removed from the analysis.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
73
Appendix 5. Results for All Respondents, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
120
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
47%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
23%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
31%
NR
NR
NR
NR
109
81
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
11%
22%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
34%
33%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
28%
22%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
28%
22%
NR
NR
NR
Delinquency Rate, Change Over Previous Year (%)
Days Cash on Hand (#)
Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
n=
121
124
105
117
68
Increased
43%
46%
42%
56%
39%
Decreased
7%
10%
9%
4%
3%
No Change
50%
44%
50%
40%
58%
120
124
104
116
NR
Increased
32%
44%
38%
51%
NR
Decreased
7%
6%
5%
3%
NR
No Change
62%
49%
57%
46%
NR
121
127
105
116
NR
Increased
44%
36%
48%
43%
NR
Decreased
12%
11%
10%
12%
NR
No Change
45%
53%
42%
45%
NR
Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
LLR Ratio (%)
n=
n=
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
74
Appendix 5. Results for All Respondents, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
94
103
82
93
NR
Increased
23%
18%
23%
19%
NR
Decreased
26%
34%
40%
40%
NR
No Change
51%
48%
37%
41%
NR
96
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
26%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
30%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
44%
NR
NR
NR
NR
120
127
106
118
NR
Increased
32%
22%
29%
28%
NR
Decreased
26%
38%
39%
42%
NR
43%
40%
32%
31%
NR
119
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
33%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Ability to Access Capital (%)
Ability to Access Capital, Change Over Previous Year (%)
Capital Liquidity (%)
No Change Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
n=
n=
No Change
4Q08
3Q08
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
117
128
106
118
NR
Debt
13%
13%
16%
15%
NR
Equity
12%
15%
9%
14%
NR
Both
23%
23%
25%
25%
NR
52% 117
49% 126
49% 105
47% 116
NR NR
Increased
9%
14%
14%
15%
NR
Decreased
9%
16%
16%
13%
NR
No Change OUTLOOK
83% 3Q09
70% 2Q09
70% 1Q09
72% 4Q08
NR 3Q08
113
122
102
116
NR
Increased
64%
70%
73%
83%
NR
Decreased
6%
4%
4%
5%
NR
No Change
30%
25%
24%
12%
NR
113
128
102
115**
NR
Improve
32%
29%
25%
26%
NR
Deteriorate
19%
24%
25%
57%
NR
No Change
49%
47%
51%
30%
NR
111
124
100
113
NR
30%
33%
36%
37%
NR
Capital-Constrained (%)
Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes
n=
n=
n=
n=
n=
No 70% 67% 64% 63% NR ** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
75
Appendix 6. Trend Analysis, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
47
45
45
Increased
51%
58%
60%
Decreased
17%
13%
16%
No Change
32%
29%
24%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
2Q09
46
47
47
Increased
48%
64%
36%
Decreased
20%
11%
32%
No Change
33%
26%
32%
44
45
47
31-60 days
2.4%
2.1%
2.7%
61-90 days
1.1%
1.5%
1.8%
90+ days
5.4%
6.0%
4.4%
9.0%
9.7%
8.8%
44
45
47
0.7%
0.7%
0.4%
47
47
47
Increased
49%
34%
43%
Decreased
19%
32%
19%
No Change
32%
34%
38%
46
36
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk*
n=
n=
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
0-90 days
7%
19%
NR
91-180 days
30%
33%
NR
181-365 days
37%
22%
NR
greater than 365
26%
25%
NR
47
45
46
Increased
38%
51%
48%
Decreased
13%
9%
9%
No Change
49%
40%
43%
47
45
46
Increased
21%
33%
30%
Decreased
13%
9%
9%
No Change
66%
58%
61%
47
47
47
Increased
43%
36%
45%
Decreased
15%
15%
17%
Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
LLR Ratio (%)
n=
n=
n=
No Change 43% 49% 38% * The 2ndQ09 portfolio-at-risk figures in this table do not match the analysis in Section II of the report because outliers are removed from the analysis.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
76
Appendix 6. Trend Analysis, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued Trend Analysis
Ability to Access Capital (%)
3Q09
1Q09
45
42
40
Increased
24%
19%
33%
Decreased
13%
21%
25%
No Change
62%
60%
43%
47
46
47
Increased
40%
20%
38%
Decreased
21%
30%
32%
No Change
38%
50%
30%
47
47
47
Debt
15%
17%
15%
Equity
11%
11%
4%
Both
28%
23%
32%
Neither
47%
49%
49%
47
46
47
Increased
9%
17%
26%
Decreased
9%
17%
17%
No Change
83%
65%
57%
47
46
47
Increase
64%
70%
64%
Decrease
0%
9%
2%
36%
22%
34%
47
47
47
Improve
32%
26%
19%
Deteriorate
17%
17%
30%
No Change
51%
57%
51%
46
47
46
Yes
22%
23%
20%
No
78%
77%
80%
Capital Liquidity (%)
Capital-Constrained (%)
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
2Q09
n=
n=
n=
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
n=
77
Appendix 7: Results by Asset Size Appendix 7A. Results for Small CDFIs (less than $10MM in Assets), 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%)
1Q09
4Q08
61
44
60
39
46
34
44
Increased
48%
62%
64%
73%
Increased
28%
24%
32%
18%
Decreased
12%
16%
11%
15%
Decreased
31%
39%
38%
36%
No Change
40%
21%
25%
12%
No Change
41%
37%
29%
45%
57
NR
NR
NR
43
NR
NR
NR
Increased
58%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
26%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
14%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
40%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
28%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
35%
NR
NR
NR
57
60
45
59
57
61
45
61
Increased
39%
40%
38%
61%
Increased
32%
26%
33%
23%
Decreased
21%
18%
24%
22%
Decreased
23%
44%
31%
46%
No Change
40%
42%
38%
17%
No Change
46%
30%
36%
31%
56
NR
NR
NR
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
58
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
57
NR
NR
NR
Increased
37%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
27%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
23%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
23%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
40%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
50%
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
n=
Capital-Constrained (%)
50
55
37
50
31-60 days
2.8%
4.2%
4.0%
3.6%
Debt
61-90 days
1.3%
2.1%
2.4%
2.2%
90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Increased
6.4%
7.6%
4.2%
8.8%
10.6%
13.9%
10.6%
14.6%
54
61
45
61
9%
8%
9%
10%
Equity
11%
21%
4%
13%
Both
24%
25%
27%
23%
Neither
56%
46%
60%
54%
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
46
49
40
52
1.0%
1.1%
0.5%
3.0%
Increased
44
60
11%
12%
44
61
Decreased
7%
13%
11%
7%
27%
41%
No Change
83%
75%
77%
82%
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
28%
16%
11%
42%
57%
48%
Increased Decreased
57
NR
NR
NR
Increased
42%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
18%
NR
NR
NR
40%
NR
NR
NR
50
45
NR
NR
0-90 days
12%
29%
NR
91-180 days
46%
29%
181-365 days
26%
greater than 365
16%
n=
60 12%
60
50%
No Change
54 9%
30%
16%
Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
58
No Change n=
n=
34%
Decreased Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
58
59
44
60
34%
46%
36%
48%
9%
10%
5%
3%
57%
44%
59%
48%
57
58
43
60
Increased
26%
43%
35%
48%
Decreased
4%
2%
2%
2%
NR
No Change
70%
55%
63%
50%
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
58
60
44
61
11%
NR
NR
Increased
36%
40%
34%
36%
9%
NR
NR
Decreased
12%
10%
2%
15%
No Change
52%
50%
64%
49%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
78
Appendix 7A. Results for Small CDFIs (less than $10MM in Assets), 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
52
58
42
60
Increase
67%
69%
76%
87%
Decrease
8%
3%
2%
3%
25%
28%
21%
10%
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
52
61
42
60
Improve
38%
38%
36%
27%
Deteriorate
15%
21%
19%
48%
46%
41%
45%
37%
No Change
n=
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
52
58
41
58
Yes
31%
34%
41%
33%
No
69%
66%
59%
67%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
79
Appendix 7B. Results for Medium CDFIs ($10MM to $50MM in Assets), 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
4Q08
38
45
37
34
Increased
68%
60%
59%
53%
Decreased
16%
11%
16%
21%
No Change
16%
29%
24%
26%
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
Ability to Access Capital (%)
1Q09
4Q08
33
37
28
31
Increased
18%
11%
21%
16%
Decreased
27%
30%
43%
39%
No Change
55%
59%
36%
45%
31
NR
NR
NR
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
38
NR
NR
NR
Increased
79%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
26%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
13%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
26%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
8%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
48%
NR
NR
NR
38
45
38
33
38
44
38
34
Increased
63%
67%
39%
48%
Increased
37%
20%
29%
41%
Decreased
21%
13%
29%
33%
Decreased
37%
36%
47%
35%
No Change
16%
20%
32%
18%
No Change
26%
43%
24%
24%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
3Q09
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
38
NR
NR
NR
38
NR
NR
NR
Increased
55%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
39%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
21%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
45%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
24%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
16%
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
36
40
35
31
38
45
38
34
31-60 days
2.6%
1.5%
1.8%
1.6%
Debt
13%
16%
21%
21%
61-90 days
1.1%
1.0%
1.4%
1.4%
Equity
16%
11%
18%
15%
90+ days
4.7%
4.2%
5.3%
5.3%
Both
26%
18%
24%
29%
Total
8.4%
6.8%
8.4%
8.3%
Neither
45%
56%
37%
35%
38
45
38
34
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
CapitalConstrained (%)
n=
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Increased
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
37
38
35
33
0.7%
1.5%
0.5%
0.6%
Increased
3%
13%
13%
21%
38
44
38
34
Decreased
11%
16%
18%
12%
45%
25%
32%
62%
No Change
87%
71%
68%
68%
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
n=
Decreased
21%
34%
21%
3%
No Change
34%
41%
47%
35%
Increased
38
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
3%
7%
8%
3%
39%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
53%
50%
58%
38%
Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
Increased
Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
Decreased
32%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
29%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
Days Cash on Hand (%)
n=
n=
n=
38
44
38
34
45%
43%
34%
59%
38
45
38
34
29%
47%
47%
56%
37
32
NR
NR
Decreased
8%
9%
5%
3%
0-90 days
14%
16%
NR
NR
No Change
63%
44%
47%
41%
91-180 days
27%
28%
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
38
45
38
34
181-365 days
30%
25%
NR
NR
Increased
45%
27%
61%
44%
greater than 365
30%
28%
NR
NR
Decreased
11%
9%
13%
3%
No Change
45%
64%
26%
53%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
80
Appendix 7B. Results for Medium CDFIs ($10MM to $50MM in Assets), 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
3Q09
n=
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
1Q09
4Q08
37
43
37
33
37
44
37
34
76%
77%
76%
85%
Yes
41%
36%
35%
50%
No
59%
64%
65%
50%
3%
5%
8%
9%
22%
19%
16%
6%
37
45
37
33
Improve
30%
20%
22%
33%
Deteriorate
24%
29%
30%
61%
No Change
46%
51%
49%
24%
n=
2Q09
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
81
Appendix 7C. Results for Large CDFIs (More than $50MM in Assets), 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%)
1Q09
4Q08
25
20
23
18
22
20
20
16
60%
50%
48%
44%
Increased
23%
20%
10%
25%
Decreased
24%
25%
30%
28%
Decreased
14%
30%
40%
50%
No Change
16%
25%
22%
28%
No Change
64%
50%
50%
25%
25
NR
NR
NR
22
NR
NR
NR
Increased
40%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
27%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
44%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
18%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
16%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
55%
NR
NR
NR
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
Increased
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
25
22
23
19
25
22
23
19
Increased
56%
50%
13%
16%
Increased
24%
14%
22%
26%
Decreased
20%
14%
61%
42%
Decreased
16%
23%
39%
37%
No Change
24%
36%
26%
42%
No Change
60%
64%
39%
37%
25
NR
NR
NR
Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
25
NR
NR
NR
Increased
36%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
36%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
48%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
32%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
16%
NR
NR
NR
32%
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
21
20
22
17
31-60 days
2.0%
3.2%
1.9%
2.0%
Debt
61-90 days
0.7%
1.0%
1.3%
1.0%
Equity
8%
5%
4%
5%
90+ days
5.2%
4.8%
4.8%
3.1%
Both
16%
27%
26%
26%
Total
7.9%
9.0%
8.0%
6.1%
Neither
56%
45%
48%
42%
21
20
23
18
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.2%
Increased
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
No Change Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Increased
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
n=
25
22
23
19
20%
23%
22%
26%
25
21
23
19
16%
24%
22%
16%
25
22
23
19
Decreased
8%
24%
22%
32%
56%
50%
48%
68%
No Change
76%
52%
57%
53%
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Decreased
28%
27%
26%
11%
25
21
23
19
No Change
16%
23%
26%
21%
Increased
60%
52%
65%
74%
25
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
12%
19%
17%
5%
Increased
68%
NR
NR
NR
28%
29%
17%
21%
Decreased
20%
NR
NR
NR
25
21
23
19
No Change
12%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
48%
43%
30%
47%
Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
22
15
NR
NR
Decreased
12%
14%
9%
11%
5%
0%
NR
NR
No Change
40%
43%
61%
42%
91-180 days
18%
33%
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
25
22
23
19
181-365 days
27%
33%
NR
NR
Increased
60%
45%
52%
63%
greater than 365
50%
33%
NR
NR
Decreased
12%
18%
22%
16%
No Change
28%
36%
26%
21%
0-90 days
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
82
Appendix 7C. Results for Large CDFIs (More than $50MM in Assets), 4thQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
24
21
23
19
Increase
38%
62%
61%
68%
Decrease
8%
5%
0%
0%
54%
33%
39%
32%
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
24
22
23
19
Improve
n=
21%
23%
9%
16%
Deteriorate
21%
23%
26%
74%
No Change
58%
55%
65%
26%
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
22
22
22
17
Yes
9%
23%
27%
24%
No
91%
77%
73%
76%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
83
Appendix 7D. Trend Analysis for Small CDFIs, 1stQ09 - 3rdQ09 Trend Analysis Respondents Type
n=
14
Banks
0%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
100%
Venture Funds
0%
Financing Sector
n=
Business
14 29%
Commercial Real Estate
0%
Community Services
0%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals
7%
Housing to Organizations
36%
Microenterprise
21%
Multiple/Other
7%
Urban/Rural Market
n=
14
Primarily Rural
29%
Primarily Urban
43%
Equally Rural/Urban
29%
Region
n=
14
Midwest
21%
Northeast
21%
South
57%
West
0%
Size
n=
Less than $10MM
14 100%
$10MM-50MM
0%
More than $50MM
0%
This analysis is for CDFIs that listed less than $10 million of assets in 3rd quarter. Some CDFIs listed CDFIs less than $10 million in previous quarters and are not included.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
84
Appendix 7D. Trend Analysis for Small CDFIs, 1stQ09 - 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
2Q09
1Q09
n=
14 36% 7% 57%
14 71% 14% 14%
13 62% 8% 31%
n=
14 36% 14% 43%
14 50% 21% 29%
14 43% 0% 57%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
14 3.7% 2.2% 7.1% 13.0%
14 2.9% 2.5% 9.3% 14.7%
14 4.2% 2.4% 6.9% 13.6%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
14 1.0% 14 43% 21%
14 0.8% 14 36% 21%
14 0.6% 14 43% 14%
36%
43%
43%
14 29% 14%
13 62% 0%
13 38% 8%
57%
38%
54%
14 29% 71%
13 54% 0%
13 31% 8%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
0%
46%
62%
14 29% 14% 57%
14 50% 7% 43%
14 43% 0% 57%
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Yes No
1Q09
n=
13 31% 15% 54%
13 31% 23% 46%
12 58% 17% 25%
n=
14 43% 14% 43%
14 29% 43% 29%
14 50% 14% 36%
n=
14 21% 14% 29% 36%
14 14% 14% 36% 36%
14 14% 0% 50% 36%
n=
14 0% 14% 86%
14 7% 21% 71%
14 29% 14% 57%
n=
14
13
14
71% 0% 29%
69% 15% 15%
71% 0% 29%
14
14
14
36% 21% 43%
43% 21% 36%
36% 29% 36%
14
14
14
21% 79%
21% 79%
14% 86%
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
85
Appendix 7E. Trend Analysis for Medium CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
18
Banks
0%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
100%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
Business
18 28%
Commercial Real Estate
6%
Community Services
6%
Consumer
6%
Housing to Individuals
17%
Housing to Organizations
28%
Microenterprise
11%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
0% n=
18
Primarily Rural
17%
Primarily Urban
61%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
22% n=
18
Midwest
22%
Northeast
28%
South
22%
West
28%
Size Less than $10MM $10MM-50MM More than $50MM
n=
18 0% 100% 0%
*This analysis is for CDFIs that listed less than $10 million of assets in 3rd quarter. Some CDFIs listed CDFIs less than $10 million in previous quarters and are not included.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
86
Appendix 7E. Trend Analysis for Medium CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued Trend Analysis Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
Trend Analysis
n=
18 67% 17% 17%
18 56% 6% 39%
17 76% 0% 24%
Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
18 50% 22% 28%
18 72% 6% 22%
18 56% 17% 28%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
17 1.6% 0.6% 5.0% 7.2%
18 1.0% 1.1% 4.7% 6.8%
18 2.1% 1.9% 3.6% 7.7%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
17 0.7% 18 50% 11%
18 0.9% 18 17% 44%
18 0.4% 18 39% 11%
39%
39%
50%
18 33% 6%
18 44% 6%
18 33% 6%
61%
50%
61%
18 6% 17%
18 22% 11%
18 39% 11%
78%
67%
50%
18 39% 17% 44%
18 28% 17% 56%
18 50% 17% 33%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
n=
18 22% 17% 61%
15 7% 13% 80%
13 31% 23% 46%
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
18 56% 33% 11%
17 12% 29% 59%
18 33% 44% 22%
Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
18 11% 11% 39% 39%
18 17% 11% 17% 56%
18 11% 11% 17% 61%
n=
18 0% 11% 89%
18 17% 17% 67%
18 22% 17% 61%
n=
18
18
18
83% 0% 17%
78% 6% 17%
72% 6% 22%
18
18
18
39% 17% 44%
17% 6% 78%
11% 39% 50%
18
18
18
33% 67%
33% 67%
28% 72%
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
n=
n=
87
Appendix 7F. Trend Analysis for Large CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
Banks Credit Unions
7%
Loan Funds
87%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
Business Commercial Real Estate
15 7% 20%
Community Services
20%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals Housing to Organizations
7% 40%
Microenterprise
0%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
15 13%
7% n=
14
Primarily Rural
21%
Primarily Urban
64%
Equally Rural/Urban
21%
Region
n=
15
Midwest
27%
Northeast
33%
South
27%
West Size Less than $10MM $10MM-50MM More than $50MM
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
13% n=
15 0% 0% 100%
88
Appendix 7F. Trend Analysis for Large CDFIs, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
2Q09
1Q09
n=
15 47% 27% 27%
13 46% 23% 31%
15 40% 40% 20%
n=
15 53% 20% 27%
15 67% 7% 27%
15 7% 80% 13%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
13 2.2% 0.6% 4.2% 7.1%
13 2.8% 1.0% 4.4% 8.1%
15 2.7% 1.8% 4.8% 9.2%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
13 0.3% 15 53% 27%
13 0.4% 15 53% 27%
15 0.4% 15 47% 33%
20%
20%
20%
15 53% 20%
14 50% 21%
15 73% 13%
27%
29%
13%
15 33% 20%
14 29% 14%
15 20% 7%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
47%
57%
73%
15 60% 13% 27%
15 33% 20% 47%
15 40% 33% 27%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Yes No
1Q09
n=
14 21% 7% 71%
14 21% 29% 50%
15 13% 33% 53%
n=
15 20% 13% 67%
15 20% 20% 60%
15 33% 33% 33%
n=
15 13% 7% 13% 67%
15 20% 7% 20% 53%
15 20% 0% 33% 47%
n=
15 27% 0% 73%
14 29% 14% 57%
15 27% 20% 53%
n=
15
15
15
33% 0% 67%
60% 7% 33%
47% 0% 53%
15
15
15
20% 13% 67%
20% 27% 53%
13% 20% 67%
14
15
14
7% 93%
13% 87%
14% 86%
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
n=
89
Appendix 8: Results by Financing Sectors Appendix 8A. Results for Business CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased
n=
Decreased No Change greater than 365 Days Cash on Hand (#) 0-90 days 91-180 days 181-365 days greater than 365
33 58% 15% 27%
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
33 58% 12% 30%
28 79% 4% 18%
16 50% 28% 22%
Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
26 77% 4% 19%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
26 54% 19% 27%
33 42% 12% 45%
33 39% 27% 33%
28 61% 14% 25%
NR NR NR NR
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change CapitalConstrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased
n=
26 46% 19% 35%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
26 2.1% 1.5% 5.7% 9.3%
28 3.7% 1.8% 4.7% 10.1%
28 2.7% 1.5% 5.8% 10.0%
23 2.6% 1.8% 7.6% 12.0%
NR NR NR NR NR
25 0.7%
24 1.7%
33 0.5%
24 0.9%
16 NR
26 42%
32 34%
31 38%
24 52%
NR 28%
23% 35%
38% 28%
9% 53%
4% 44%
11% 61%
26 42%
22 NR
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
23% 35% 0%
NR NR NR
NR NR NR
NR NR NR
NR NR NR
Decreased No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
26 15% 23% 27% 35%
22 27% 41% 18% 14%
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
Decreased No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%) Increased
26 73% 8% 19%
2Q09
n=
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
n=
23 26% 13% 61%
30 30% 33% 37%
27 22% 44% 33%
21 14% 38% 48%
NR NR NR NR
n=
22 18% 23% 59%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
26 42% 27% 31%
33 30% 27% 42%
33 27% 45% 27%
29 24% 45% 31%
NR NR NR NR
n=
26 46% 35% 19%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
25 20% 8% 20% 52%
33 3% 9% 33% 55%
33 9% 9% 27% 55%
29 7% 14% 34% 45%
NR NR NR NR NR
n=
26 8%
33 18%
32 13%
28 14%
NR NR
12% 81%
21% 61%
13% 75%
0% 86%
NR NR
26 35%
33 55%
33 45%
29 48%
16 38%
4% 62%
9% 36%
3% 52%
0% 52%
0% 72%
26 31% 4%
32 38% 6%
32 41% 0%
27 41% 4%
16 NR NR
65% 26 46% 12% 42%
56% 32 38% 16% 47%
59% 32 53% 9% 38%
56% 27 41% 11% 48%
NR NR NR NR NR
n=
n=
n=
90
Appendix 8A. Results for Business CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%) Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%) Improve Deteriorate No Change
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
n=
26 77% 0% 23%
31 74% 0% 26%
33 73% 27% 0%
28 100% 0% 0%
NR NR NR NR
n=
26 19% 23% 58%
33 21% 27% 52%
33 18% 33% 48%
27 19% 63% 30%
NR NR NR NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
n=
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
26 23% 77%
32 34% 66%
33 30% 70%
28 29% 71%
NR NR NR
91
Appendix 8B. Results for Commercial Real Estate CDFIs*, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased
n=
Decreased No Change Days Cash on Hand (#) 0-90 days 91-180 days 181-365 days greater than 365
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
8 75% 25% 0%
NR NR NR NR
6 17% 50% 33%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
8 75% 25% 0%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
8 37% 25% 38%
NR NR NR NR
6 17% 67% 17%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
8 25% 63% 13%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 0.3% 0.7% 11.3% 12.3%
NR NR NR NR NR
5 1.6% 1.0% 2.2% 4.8%
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
n=
3 0.1%
NR 0.9%
6 0.2%
NR NR
NR NR
n=
8 63%
NR NR
6 17%
NR NR
NR NR
Decreased No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%) Increased
3Q09
n=
n=
13% 25%
NR NR
50% 33%
NR NR
NR NR
8 75%
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
13% 13%
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
7 0% 29% 43% 29%
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change CapitalConstrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
n=
8 13% 50% 38%
NR NR NR NR
5 0% 80% 20%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
7 14% 43% 43%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
8 50% 13% 38%
NR NR NR NR
6 17% 67% 17%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
8 50% 13% 38%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
8 0% 0% 50% 50%
NR NR NR NR NR
6 0% 0% 67% 33%
NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR
n=
8 13%
NR NR
6 33%
NR NR
NR NR
0% 88%
NR NR
33% 33%
NR NR
NR NR
8 63%
NR NR
6 67%
NR NR
NR NR
0% 33%
NR NR
0% 33%
NR NR
NR NR
8 38%
NR NR
6 17%
NR NR
NR NR
0% 63% 8 63% 13% 25%
NR NR NR NR NR NR
0% 83% 6 17% 33% 50%
NR NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR NR
Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased
Decreased No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
n=
n=
92
Appendix 8B. Results for Commercial Real Estate CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%) Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%) Improve Deteriorate No Change
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
n=
8 63% 13% 25%
NR NR NR NR
6 67% 0% 33%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
8 38% 38% 25%
NR NR NR NR
6 33% 0% 67%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
n=
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
7 57% 43%
NR NR NR
6 67% 33%
NR NR NR
NR NR NR
* A breakout is not provided for commercial real estate respondents for 2nd quarter 2009, and 3rd and 4th quarter 2008 as there was an insufficient number of respondents to allow for analysis.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
93
Appendix 8C. Results for Community Services/Facilities CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased
n=
Decreased No Change Days Cash on Hand (#) 0-90 days 91-180 days 181-365 days greater than 365
14 50% 14% 36%
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
9 67% 0% 33%
7 86% 0% 14%
5 40% 0% 60%
Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
5 60% 20% 20%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
5 80% 20% 0%
14 71% 7% 21%
9 11% 33% 56%
7 43% 14% 43%
NR NR NR NR
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
5 80% 0% 20%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 3.6% 0.5% 2.5% 6.6%
13 2.5% 0.4% 4.5% 7.4%
8 1.2% 0.3% 4.5% 5.9%
6 1.2% 0.1% 5.8% 7.6%
NR NR NR NR NR
5 0.0% 5 60%
13 0.5% 14 29%
8 0.0% 9 11%
6* 0.7% 7 43%
NR NR 5 0%
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%) Increased Decreased No Change CapitalConstrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased
n=
Decreased No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%) Increased
5 48% 20% 40%
2Q09
n=
n=
40% 0%
14% 57%
22% 67%
0% 57%
20% 80%
5 100%
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
0% 0% 5 0% 40% 20% 40%
NR NR 8 0% 50% 13% 38%
NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
Decreased No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
n=
5 0% 0% 100%
13 8% 38% 54%
7 0% 29% 71%
5 0% 40% 60%
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 40% 0% 60%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 0% 60% 40%
14 14% 29% 57%
9 0% 22% 78%
7 14% 43% 43%
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 40% 20% 40%
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 20% 20% 0% 60%
14 21% 0% 14% 64%
9 22% 0% 0% 78%
7 14% 0% 29% 57%
NR NR NR NR NR
n=
5 20% 0% 80%
14 14% 21% 64%
9 22% 22% 56%
7 14% 43% 43%
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 80%
14 14%
9 22%
7 71%
5 40%
0% 20%
7% 79%
0% 78%
0% 29%
0% 60%
5 40% 20% 40% 5 40% 0% 60%
14 29% 7% 64% 14 21% 14% 64%
9 11% 0% 89% 9 56% 11% 33%
7 57% 0% 43% 7 29% 14% 57%
NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
n=
n=
94
Appendix 8C. Results for Community Services/Facilities CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%) Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%) Improve Deteriorate No Change
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
n=
5 60% 0% 40%
14 79% 21% 0%
9 56% 11% 33%
6 100% 0% 0%
NR NR NR NR
n=
5 20% 40% 40%
14 29% 29% 43%
9 0% 11% 89%
7 14% 57% 29%
NR NR NR NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
n=
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
5 20% 80%
13 8% 92%
8 25% 75%
7 29% 71%
NR NR NR
95
Appendix 8D. Results for Consumer CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
14
8
NR
6
NR
Increased
50%
38%
NR
17%
NR
Increased
Decreased
0%
25%
NR
67%
NR
Decreased
50%
38%
NR
17%
NR
14
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
57%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
21%
NR
NR
NR
NR
21%
NR
NR
NR
NR
14
8
NR
5
NR
Increased
50%
25%
NR
17%
NR
Increased
Decreased
21%
38%
NR
67%
NR
Decreased
29%
38%
NR
17%
NR
No Change
Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
n=
4Q08
3Q08
NR
3
NR
NR
33%
NR
25%
NR
0%
NR
40%
75%
NR
67%
NR
6
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
50%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
17%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
33%
NR
NR
NR
NR
14
8
NR
6
NR
0%
38%
NR
33%
NR
21%
38%
NR
33%
NR
79%
25%
NR
33%
NR
Ability to Access Capital (%)
No Change Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
Capital Liquidity (%)
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
n=
1Q09
5
4
40%
0%
20%
14
NR
NR
NR
NR
14
NR
NR
NR
NR
36%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
21%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
36%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
28%
NR
NR
NR
NR
50%
NR
NR
NR
NR
14
8
NR
NR
NR
14
8
NR
6
NR
31-60 days
2.3%
2.7%
NR
NR
NR
Debt
61-90 days
1.5%
2.2%
NR
NR
NR
Equity
90+ days
4.4%
1.5%
NR
NR
NR
Both
Total
8.2%
6.4%
NR
NR
NR
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Increased
Decreased No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
7
1.5% 14 36%
NR
n=
Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
0%
NR
0%
NR
38%
NR
17%
NR
0%
0%
NR
17%
NR
86%
63%
NR
67%
NR
11
8
NR
6
NR
NR
6*
1.0%
NR
3.4%
NR
Increased
0%
0%
NR
0%
NR
8
NR
6
NR
Decreased
0%
13%
NR
17%
NR
13%
NR
50%
NR
No Change
100%
88%
NR
83%
NR
14
7
NR
6
NR
Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
0% 14%
21%
25%
NR
17%
NR
n=
43%
63%
NR
33%
NR
Increased
43%
57%
NR
50%
NR
Decreased
14%
14%
NR
17%
NR
14%
29%
NR
33%
NR
14
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
21%
NR
NR
NR
NR
14
8
NR
6
NR
No Change
43%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
29%
63%
NR
67%
NR
12
5
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
7%
0%
NR
0%
NR
8%
80%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
64%
38%
NR
33%
NR
58%
0%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
14
8
NR
6
NR
0%
0%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
36%
50%
NR
67%
NR
33%
20%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
29%
13%
NR
17%
NR
No Change
36%
38%
NR
17%
NR
Days Cash on Hand (#) 0-90 days 91-180 days 181-365 days greater than 365
n=
14
No Change CapitalConstrained (%)
n=
2Q09
Increased
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
3Q09
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
96
Appendix 8D. Results for Consumer CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
14
7
NR
5
NR
14
6
NR
6
NR
36%
29%
NR
60%
NR
Yes
36%
83%
NR
67%
NR
Decrease
14%
0%
NR
0%
NR
No
64%
17%
NR
33%
NR
No Change
50%
71%
NR
40%
NR
14
8
NR
5
NR
43%
38%
NR
0%
NR
Deteriorate
0%
13%
NR
40%
NR
No Change
57%
50%
NR
60%
NR
Improve
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
2Q09
Increase
Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
2Q09
97
Appendix 8E. Results for Housing to Individuals CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
19
13
17
9
14
11
11
14
NR
Increased
41%
63%
62%
47%
12%
Increased
21%
9%
18%
7%
NR
Decreased
29%
16%
23%
35%
25%
Decreased
43%
45%
55%
64%
NR
29%
21%
15%
18%
63%
36%
45%
27%
29%
NR
17
NR
NR
NR
NR
16
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
59%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
19%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
18%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
44%
NR
NR
NR
NR
24%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
38%
NR
NR
NR
NR
16
18
13
18
NR
17
18
13
18
NR
Increased
44%
39%
46%
50%
NR
Increased
29%
17%
23%
28%
NR
Decreased
31%
22%
38%
28%
NR
Decreased
35%
39%
46%
56%
NR
25%
39%
15%
22%
NR
35%
44%
31%
17%
NR
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
No Change Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
17
NR
NR
NR
NR
17
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
53%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
18%
NR
NR
NR
NR
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
13
14
12
15
NR
17
19
13
18
NR
31-60 days
2.9%
8.1%
1.5%
4.4%
NR
Debt
12%
16%
23%
39%
NR
61-90 days
1.3%
3.6%
1.2%
3.0%
NR
Equity
18%
32%
15%
0%
NR
90+ days
7.5%
7.0%
1.7%
9.7%
NR
Both
35%
21%
23%
22%
NR
12%
19%
4%
13%
NR
Neither
35%
32%
38%
39%
NR
17
18
13
17
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
No Change Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
17
No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
n=
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
No Change CapitalConstrained (%)
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
n=
13
13
12
14*
NR
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
1.9%
NR
Increased
6%
11%
8%
18%
NR
17
18
13
18
9
Decreased
0%
6%
31%
12%
NR
Increased
47%
39%
46%
61%
50%
94%
83%
62%
71%
NR
Decreased
18%
17%
38%
6%
12%
35%
44%
15%
33%
38%
Increased Decreased
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
17
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
n=
41%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
17
13
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
12%
46%
NR
NR
91-180 days
59%
46%
NR
181-365 days
24%
0%
NR
6%
8%
NR
No Change Days Cash on Hand (#)
greater than 365
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investmen ts in Workout (%)
n=
n=
17
18
13
17
9
41%
44%
31%
47%
43%
0%
11%
23%
12%
0%
59%
44%
46%
41%
57%
17
18
13
18
NR
Increased
24%
28%
31%
28%
NR
Decreased
0%
0%
0%
0%
NR
NR
No Change
76%
72%
69%
72%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
17
19
13
18
NR
NR
NR
Increased
24%
21%
46%
22%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
12%
0%
8%
11%
NR
No Change
65%
79%
46%
67%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
98
Appendix 8E. Results for Housing to Individuals CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
17
17
13
18
NR
17
18
13
18
NR
Increase
71%
71%
85%
78%
NR
Yes
25%
50%
38%
50%
NR
Decrease
6%
0%
8%
11%
NR
No
75%
50%
62%
50%
NR
24%
29%
8%
11%
NR
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
0.17
19
13
18**
NR
Improve
n=
41%
21%
46%
28%
NR
Deteriorate
18%
42%
15%
61%
NR
No Change
41%
37%
38%
22%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
2Q09
99
Appendix 8F. Results for Housing to Organizations CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
26
21
33
16
26
24
15
28
NR
Increased
44%
50%
57%
52%
44%
Increased
27%
13%
40%
21%
NR
Decreased
24%
19%
24%
24%
17%
Decreased
23%
33%
27%
39%
NR
31%
31%
19%
24%
39%
50%
54%
33%
39%
NR
28
NR
NR
NR
NR
25
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
39%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
39%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
21%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
36%
NR
NR
NR
NR
29
28
22
33
NR
28
28
22
33
NR
Increased
41%
61%
23%
30%
NR
Increased
32%
14%
45%
33%
NR
Decreased
21%
11%
41%
39%
NR
Decreased
25%
46%
32%
33%
NR
38%
29%
36%
30%
NR
No Change
43%
39%
23%
33%
NR
28
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
n=
Increased
28
NR
NR
NR
NR
25%
No Change Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
Capital Liquidity (%)
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
29
No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
n=
n=
n=
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
39%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
39%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
36%
NR
NR
NR
NR
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
28
27
22
31
NR
28
28
22
33
NR
31-60 days
1.7%
1.1%
2.1%
1.4%
NR
Debt
18%
21%
18%
18%
NR
61-90 days
0.4%
0.7%
1.7%
0.9%
NR
Equity
14%
11%
9%
21%
NR
90+ days
5.2%
6.6%
5.7%
4.5%
NR
Both
29%
29%
41%
21%
NR
Total
7.3%
8.4%
9.6%
6.1%
NR
Neither
39%
39%
32%
39%
NR
28
27
22
32*
NR
29
28
22
33
NR
0.1%
1.5%
0.5%
0.2%
NR
Increased
10%
21%
23%
15%
NR
Decreased
17%
14%
14%
24%
NR
72%
64%
64%
61%
NR
29
28
22
33
16
55%
44%
Portfolio-at-Risk
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
n=
29
28
22
33
16
Increased
28%
18%
41%
45%
39%
Decreased
21%
36%
18%
12%
6%
52%
46%
41%
42%
55%
Increased
38%
50%
45%
Decreased
17%
11%
18%
3%
0%
45%
39%
36%
42%
56%
No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
No Change CapitalConstrained (%)
n=
28
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
28
28
22
33
NR
No Change
36%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
29%
57%
50%
55%
NR
27
22
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
18%
14%
23%
9%
NR
0-90 days
11%
5%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
54%
29%
27%
36%
NR
91-180 days
19%
9%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
29
28
22
33
NR
181-365 days
33%
50%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
45%
43%
50%
52%
NR
greater than 365
37%
36%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
13%
14%
14%
9%
NR
No Change
41%
43%
36%
39%
NR
Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
100
Appendix 8F. Results for Housing to Organizations CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
28
28
22
33
NR
28
28
21
32
NR
Increase
59%
64%
68%
70%
NR
Yes
29%
39%
29%
38%
NR
Decrease
7%
11%
5%
6%
NR
No
71%
61%
71%
63%
NR
35%
25%
27%
24%
NR
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
28
28
22
33**
NR
Improve
n=
25%
29%
18%
24%
NR
Deteriorate
25%
18%
32%
55%
NR
No Change
50%
54%
50%
36%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
2Q09
101
Appendix 8G. Results for Microenterprise CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
13
20
11
22
NR
8
15
8
19
NR
Increased
69%
80%
73%
77%
NR
Increased
25%
27%
63%
32%
NR
Decreased
15%
10%
9%
9%
NR
Decreased
25%
27%
13%
32%
NR
No Change
15%
10%
18%
14%
NR
No Change
50%
47%
25%
37%
NR
9
NR
NR
NR
NR
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
2Q09
13
NR
NR
NR
NR
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
Increased
77%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
44%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
23%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
22%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
0%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
33%
NR
NR
NR
NR
13
20
12
21
NR
Capital Liquidity (%)
13
20
12
22
NR
Increased
62%
50%
42%
67%
NR
Increased
38%
15%
33%
23%
NR
Decreased
23%
20%
42%
24%
NR
Decreased
23%
55%
25%
45%
NR
No Change
15%
30%
17%
10%
NR
No Change
38%
30%
42%
32%
NR
13
NR
NR
NR
NR
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
n=
n=
13
NR
NR
NR
NR
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
Increased
69%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
31%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change CapitalConstrained (%)
54%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
n=
13
20
12
22
NR
13
20
12
22
NR
31-60 days
3.3%
2.5%
7.3%
3.8%
NR
Debt
15%
20%
25%
9%
NR
61-90 days
2.1%
1.4%
4.4%
2.1%
NR
Equity
15%
15%
17%
14%
NR
90+ days
5.3%
9.3%
7.0%
10.1%
NR
Both
8%
10%
8%
18%
NR
10.6%
13.2%
18.7%
15.9%
NR
Neither
62%
55%
50%
59%
NR
13
18
12
21*
NR
2.4%
1.2%
1.1%
4.9%
NR
Increased Decreased
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
13
20
12
22
NR
Increased
62%
45%
50%
50%
NR
Decreased
23%
40%
17%
18%
NR
No Change
15%
15%
33%
32%
NR
Increased
Decreased
Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
13
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
n=
62%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
23%
NR
NR
NR
NR
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
13
14
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
15%
57%
NR
NR
91-180 days
31%
29%
NR
181-365 days
46%
7%
NR
8%
7%
NR
No Change Days Cash on Hand (#)
greater than 365
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
n=
n=
13
20
12
22
NR
0%
5%
8%
9%
NR
8%
15%
17%
5%
NR
92%
80%
75%
86%
NR
13
20
12
22
NR
62%
45%
58%
68%
NR
8%
15%
8%
5%
NR
31%
40%
33%
27%
NR
13
20
12
22
NR
Increased
46%
65%
58%
73%
NR
Decreased
0%
5%
0%
0%
NR
NR
No Change
54%
30%
42%
27%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
13
20
12
22
NR
NR
NR
Increased
46%
40%
67%
41%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
0%
10%
0%
18%
NR
No Change
54%
50%
33%
41%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
102
Appendix 8G. Results for Microenterprise CDFIs, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
13
20
12
20
NR
13
20
12
22
NR
Increase
77%
80%
92%
95%
NR
Yes
38%
30%
25%
25%
NR
Decrease
8%
5%
0%
0%
NR
No
62%
70%
75%
75%
NR
15%
15%
8%
5%
NR
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
13
20
12
22**
NR
54%
50%
58%
50%
NR
Deteriorate
8%
15%
17%
55%
NR
No Change
38%
35%
25%
23%
NR
Improve
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
3Q09
103
Appendix 8H. Trend Analysis, Primarily Business Lenders, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
10
Banks
0%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
100%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
Business
10 100%
Commercial Real Estate
0%
Community Services
0%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals
0%
Housing to Organizations
0%
Microenterprise
0%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
0% n=
10
Primarily Rural
30%
Primarily Urban
50%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
20% n=
10
Midwest
20%
Northeast
40%
South
30%
West
10%
Size
n=
10
Less than $10MM
40%
$10MM-50MM
50%
More than $50MM
10%
This analysis is for CDFIs that listed business as the primary financing sector in 3rd quarter. As CDFIs lending varies some CDFIs that listed business in previous quarters did not list business in 3rd quarter and are not included.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
104
Appendix 8H. Trend Analysis, Primarily Business Lenders, 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
2Q09
1Q09
n=
10 60% 20% 20%
10 50% 10% 40%
10 50% 20% 30%
n=
10 20% 30% 50%
10 70% 10% 20%
10 70% 10% 20%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
10 1.5% 2.2% 2.7% 6.3%
9 0.4% 1.0% 2.8% 4.2%
10 1.4% 1.3% 3.3% 6.0%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
10 1.0% 10 60% 10%
9 1.3% 10 30% 40%
10 0.3% 10 50% 0%
30%
30%
50%
10 20% 0%
10 50% 0%
10 50% 0%
80%
50%
50%
10 10% 0%
10 30% 0%
10 50% 0%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
n=
90% 10 50% 20% 30%
70% 10 30% 30% 40%
50% 10 50% 20% 30%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
1Q09
n=
9 33% 0% 67%
10 20% 20% 60%
9 22% 33% 44%
n=
10 60% 20% 20%
10 30% 10% 60%
10 30% 50% 20%
n=
10 10% 10% 30% 50%
10 0% 10% 30% 60%
10 0% 0% 50% 50%
n=
10 0% 10% 90%
10 20% 10% 70%
10 30% 20% 50%
n=
10
10
10
80% 0% 20%
90% 0% 10%
60% 0% 40%
10
10
10
10% 20% 70%
10% 20% 70%
0% 50% 50%
10 10% 90%
10 20% 80%
10 30% 70%
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
2Q09
n=
105
Appendix 8I. Trend Analysis, Primarily Housing to Organizations 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Trend Analysis Respondents Type
n=
16
Banks
0%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
100%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
16
Business
0%
Commercial Real Estate
0%
Community Services
0%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals
0%
Housing to Organizations
100%
Microenterprise
0%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
0% n=
16
Primarily Rural
25%
Primarily Urban
50%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
25% n=
16
Midwest
13%
Northeast
38%
South
38%
West Size
13% n=
16
Less than $10MM
31%
$10MM-50MM
31%
More than $50MM
38%
This analysis is for CDFIs that listed housing to organizatoins as the primary financing sector in 3rd quarter. As CDFIs lending varies some CDFIs that listed housing to organizations in previous quarters did not list housing to organizations in 3rd quarter and are not included.
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
106
Appendix 8I. Trend Analysis, Primarily Housing to Organizations 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued Trend Analysis Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
n=
16 25% 31% 44%
14 36% 21% 43%
16 63% 19% 19%
n=
16 38% 31% 31%
16 56% 6% 38%
16 13% 44% 44%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
16 2.6% 0.1% 6.9% 9.6%
16 1.3% 0.5% 7.4% 9.1%
16 2.3% 1.6% 5.6% 9.4%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
16 0.1% 16 25% 19%
16 0.4% 16 13% 44%
16 0.6% 16 38% 13%
56%
44%
50%
16 25% 25%
16 50% 13%
16 38% 13%
50%
38%
50%
16 25% 31%
16 63% 19%
16 38% 25%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
n=
44% 16 44% 19% 38%
19% 16 38% 19% 44%
38% 16 50% 19% 31%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
Trend Analysis Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
3Q09
1Q09
n=
15 27% 20% 53%
14 21% 21% 57%
13 46% 31% 23%
n=
16 44% 19% 38%
16 13% 44% 44%
16 50% 31% 19%
n=
16 13% 19% 31% 38%
16 25% 6% 31% 38%
16 19% 0% 50% 31%
n=
16 13% 19% 69%
16 25% 25% 50%
16 31% 19% 50%
n=
16
16
16
56% 0% 44%
56% 13% 31%
69% 6% 25%
16
16
16
31% 19% 50%
31% 6% 63%
25% 19% 56%
16 25% 75%
16 19% 81%
15 13% 87%
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
2Q09
n=
107
Appendix 9: Results by Region Appendix 9A. Results for Midwest Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
27
29
23
22
21
27
23
Increased
67%
72%
61%
68%
62%
Increased
21%
22%
Decreased
15%
7%
17%
18%
5%
Decreased
21%
35%
No Change
19%
21%
22%
14%
33%
No Change
58%
Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Ability to Access Capital (%)
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
20
20
NR
20%
35%
NR
40%
15%
NR
43%
40%
50%
NR
26
NR
NR
NR
NR
26
NR
NR
NR
NR
73%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
30%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
12%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
22%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
48%
NR
NR
NR
NR
27
29
23
21
NR
26
28
23
22
NR
Increased
59%
55%
26%
52%
NR
Increased
31%
25%
35%
36%
NR
Decreased
11%
10%
43%
29%
NR
Decreased
23%
29%
35%
27%
NR
30%
34%
30%
19%
NR
No Change
46%
46%
30%
36%
NR
26
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
26
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
50%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
58%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
27%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
27%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
23%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
2Q09
Increased
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
3Q09
23
27
21
21
NR
20
29
23
22
NR
31-60 days
2.2%
3.5%
2.9%
2.5%
NR
Debt
20%
7%
9%
9%
NR
61-90 days
0.7%
1.6%
1.9%
2.0%
NR
Equity
10%
7%
4%
23%
NR
90+ days
6.9%
3.6%
2.9%
5.1%
NR
Both
20%
24%
26%
18%
NR
Total
9.8%
8.7%
7.7%
9.7%
NR
50%
62%
61%
50%
NR
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
23
27
23
20
NR
%=
0.7%
0.5%
0.6%
1.2%
NR
Increased Decreased
27
29
23
22
21
Increased
44%
45%
26%
41%
24%
Decreased
19%
28%
30%
14%
19%
37%
28%
43%
45%
57%
Increased Decreased
No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
26
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
50%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
15%
NR
NR
NR
NR
35% 25
NR 22
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
0-90 days
16%
41%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
91-180 days
24%
23%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
181-365 days
16%
23%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
greater than 365
44%
14%
NR
NR
NR
No Change Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
n=
n=
27
28
23
22
NR
7%
11%
22%
14%
NR
7%
14%
9%
14%
NR
85%
75%
70%
73%
NR
27
27
22
22
21
44%
37%
45%
45%
33%
7%
15%
5%
0%
5%
48%
48%
50%
55%
62%
26
28
22
21
NR
35% 4%
36% 0%
36% 5%
48% 5%
NR NR
62%
64%
59%
48%
NR
27
29
23
22
NR
33%
28%
39%
18%
NR
Decreased
7%
10%
17%
23%
NR
No Change
59%
62%
43%
59%
NR
Increased Decreased n=
108
Appendix 9A. Results for Midwest Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
26
27
23
22
NR
26
28
23
21
NR
58%
70%
83%
91%
NR
Yes
35%
25%
35%
38%
NR
No
65%
75%
65%
62%
NR
4%
7%
0%
9%
NR
38%
22%
17%
0%
NR
26
29
23
22
NR
Improve
38%
31%
22%
27%
NR
Deteriorate
15%
24%
17%
45%
NR
No Change
46%
45%
61%
27%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
2Q09
109
Appendix 9B. Results for Northeast Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
31
35
27
35
15
30
31
Increased
48%
37%
19%
57%
40%
Increased
24%
16%
Decreased
19%
29%
52%
26%
27%
Decreased
24%
32%
32%
34%
30%
17%
33%
52%
Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Ability to Access Capital (%)
No Change Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
23
25
NR
17%
16%
NR
43%
56%
NR
52%
39%
28%
NR
31
NR
NR
NR
NR
30
NR
NR
NR
NR
61%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
24%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
23%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
32%
NR
NR
NR
NR
16%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
44%
NR
NR
NR
NR
31
35
28
34
NR
31
36
28
35
NR
Increased
48%
37%
36%
41%
NR
Increased
35%
22%
14%
23%
NR
Decreased
29%
26%
39%
38%
NR
Decreased
23%
47%
57%
60%
NR
23%
37%
25%
21%
NR
No Change
42%
31%
29%
17%
NR
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
31
NR
NR
NR
NR
31
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
26%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
45%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
2Q09
Increased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
3Q09
29
33
25
28
NR
31-60 days
3.2%
4.4%
4.0%
2.9%
NR
Debt
61-90 days
1.3%
1.8%
1.7%
1.8%
NR
Equity
90+ days
5.1%
6.1%
6.1%
7.3%
NR
Total
9.7%
12.3%
11.8%
12.0%
NR
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
CapitalConstrained (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Increased
29
36
28
35
NR
17%
14%
25%
20%
NR
7%
19%
11%
11%
NR
Both
28%
25%
29%
31%
NR
Neither
48%
42%
36%
37%
NR
29
35
28
34
NR
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
36
25
27
NR
0.8%
1.7%
0.2%
1.1%
NR
Increased
14%
20%
18%
21%
NR
31
36
28
34
15
Decreased
10%
20%
25%
9%
NR
45%
28%
32%
50%
33%
No Change
76%
60%
57%
71%
NR
Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
13%
39%
14%
21%
13%
No Change
42%
33%
54%
29%
53%
Increased
Decreased
n=
n=
31
35
28
35
14
42%
51%
36%
63%
21%
3%
11%
7%
6%
0%
55%
37%
57%
31%
79%
31
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
39%
NR
NR
NR
NR
31
35
28
35
NR
26%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
19%
46%
39%
49%
NR
No Change Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
29
Decreased Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
27
23
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
10%
6%
4%
3%
NR
4%
26%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
71%
49%
57%
49%
NR
91-180 days
44%
39%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
31
36
28
34
NR
181-365 days
33%
13%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
39%
36%
46%
50%
NR
greater than 365
19%
22%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
13%
11%
7%
18%
NR
No Change
48%
53%
46%
32%
NR
0-90 days
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
110
Appendix 9B. Results for Northeast Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
29
34
25
35
NR
34
27
35
NR
Increase
69%
65%
67%
77%
NR
Yes
24%
29%
24%
43%
NR
Decrease
10%
6%
0%
3%
NR
No
76%
71%
76%
57%
NR
No Change
21%
29%
33%
20%
NR
29
36
27
34
NR
Improve
n=
17%
22%
22%
18%
NR
Deteriorate
24%
25%
37%
74%
NR
No Change
59%
53%
41%
26%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
3Q09
29
Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
2Q09
111
Appendix 9C. Results for South Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
40
36
32
30
15
30
31
53%
53%
47%
60%
47%
Increased
33%
19%
Decreased
8%
14%
22%
10%
33%
Decreased
23%
35%
No Change
40%
33%
31%
30%
20%
No Change
43%
45%
40
Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
n=
Increased
Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
Ability to Access Capital (%)
Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
23
25
NR
35%
8%
NR
30%
36%
NR
35%
56%
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
58%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
18%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
25%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
39
36
32
30
NR
40
36
32
31
NR
Increased
46%
56%
31%
57%
NR
Increased
33%
25%
34%
26%
NR
Decreased
18%
14%
25%
20%
NR
Decreased
28%
31%
31%
32%
NR
36%
31%
44%
23%
NR
No Change
40%
44%
34%
42%
NR
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
40
NR
NR
NR
NR
39
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
48%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
23%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
18%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
36%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
41%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
2Q09
40
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
3Q09
n=
No Change Capital-Constrained (%)
34
31
28
26
NR
31-60 days
2.7%
2.2%
2.1%
2.8%
NR
Debt
61-90 days
1.3%
1.8%
1.5%
2.2%
NR
6.7%
9.8%
5.4%
9.9%
NR
10.8%
13.8%
9.1%
15.0%
NR
90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
30
36
32
31
NR
7%
14%
13%
13%
NR
Equity
17%
17%
9%
16%
NR
Both
27%
28%
31%
19%
NR
50%
42%
47%
52%
NR
Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
32
31
29
24
NR
39
36
32
31
NR
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
1.8%
NR
Increased
n=
10%
14%
9%
6%
NR
Decreased
13%
17%
16%
23%
NR
77%
69%
75%
71%
NR
40
36
32
30
15
47%
44%
63%
53%
40
35
32
31
15
Increased
35%
37%
28%
48%
47%
Decreased
20%
23%
16%
0%
13%
45%
40%
56%
52%
40%
Increased
43%
Decreased
10%
8%
9%
10%
0%
48%
44%
47%
27%
47%
No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
n=
40
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
50%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
20%
NR
NR
NR
NR
30%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
No Change Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
40
36
32
31
NR
38%
42%
38%
55%
NR
35
26
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
5%
11%
9%
6%
NR
9%
27%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
58%
47%
53%
39%
NR
91-180 days
31%
31%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
40
36
32
31
NR
181-365 days
34%
15%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
45%
44%
53%
52%
NR
greater than 365
26%
27%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
13%
8%
13%
6%
NR
No Change
43%
47%
34%
42%
NR
0-90 days
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
112
Appendix 9C. Results for South Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
34
35
30
30
NR
35
35
30
31
NR
Increase
71%
80%
67%
84%
NR
Yes
32%
40%
40%
37%
NR
Decrease
3%
0%
7%
6%
NR
No
68%
60%
60%
63%
NR
26%
20%
27%
10%
NR
No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
35
36
30
30
NR
Improve
n=
43%
42%
27%
40%
NR
Deteriorate
17%
22%
23%
53%
NR
No Change
40%
36%
50%
33%
NR
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
3Q09
113
Appendix 9D. Results for West Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09 3Q09
3Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
23
26
22
29
16
21
18
Increased
65%
85%
82%
69%
56%
Increased
7%
17%
Decreased
26%
12%
9%
21%
19%
Decreased
40%
33%
9%
4%
9%
10%
25%
53%
Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
No Change Number of Financing Applications Received, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Ability to Access Capital (%)
No Change Ability to Access Capital, Change from Previous Year (%)
n=
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
16
23
NR
19%
22%
NR
50%
48%
NR
50%
31%
30%
NR
23
NR
NR
NR
NR
22
NR
NR
NR
NR
52%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
18%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
30%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
29%
NR
NR
NR
NR
17%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
53%
NR
NR
NR
NR
23
27
23
30
NR
23
27
23
30
NR
Increased
48%
59%
39%
43%
NR
Increased
26%
15%
35%
30%
NR
Decreased
26%
11%
30%
30%
NR
Decreased
30%
44%
30%
40%
NR
26%
30%
30%
27%
NR
No Change
43%
41%
35%
30%
NR
No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
Capital Liquidity, Change Over Previous Year (%)
n=
23
NR
NR
NR
NR
23
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
26%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
39%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
30%
NR
NR
NR
NR
No Change
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
2Q09
Increased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
3Q09
21
24
20
24
NR
18
27
23
30
NR
31-60 days
1.9%
2.0%
1.5%
2.5%
NR
Debt
11%
19%
17%
10%
NR
61-90 days
1.1%
0.7%
2.1%
0.7%
NR
Equity
17%
15%
13%
13%
NR
90+ days
2.9%
3.4%
3.9%
4.0%
NR
Both
22%
11%
13%
27%
NR
Total
5.9%
6.1%
7.5%
7.2%
NR
Neither
50%
56%
57%
50%
NR
22
27
22
29
NR
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
CapitalConstrained (%)
n=
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Increased
Decreased
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
20
24
21
24
NR
1.1%
0.4%
0.5%
3.4%
NR
Increased
0%
11%
9%
17%
NR
23
26
22
29
16
Decreased
0%
11%
14%
7%
NR
48%
15%
50%
66%
56%
No Change
100%
78%
77%
76%
NR
Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%)
n=
30%
31%
23%
3%
6%
23
26
23
30
15
22%
54%
27%
31%
38%
Increased
43%
46%
43%
47%
53%
23
NR
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
9%
8%
13%
0%
0%
Increased
52%
NR
NR
NR
NR
48%
46%
43%
53%
47%
Decreased
13%
NR
NR
NR
NR
23
25
22
29
NR
35%
NR
NR
NR
NR
Increased
35%
56%
41%
52%
NR
22
21
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
9%
8%
0%
0%
NR
0-90 days
18%
33%
NR
NR
NR
No Change
57%
36%
59%
48%
NR
91-180 days
36%
24%
NR
NR
NR
LLR Ratio (%)
23
26
22
29
NR
181-365 days
23%
29%
NR
NR
NR
Increased
61%
35%
50%
45%
NR
greater than 365
23%
14%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
13%
15%
5%
3%
NR
No Change
26%
50%
45%
52%
NR
No Change Delinquency Rate, Change from Previous Year (%)
No Change Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
n=
114
Appendix 9D. Results for West Region, 3rdQ08 – 3rdQ09, Continued OUTLOOK
3Q09
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
Increase Decrease
3Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
3Q08
26
22
30
NR
22
27
22
27
NR
77%
83%
NR
Yes
27%
37%
45%
30%
NR
No
73%
63%
55%
70%
NR
4%
9%
3%
NR
14%
13%
NR
23
27
22
29
NR
Improve
26%
19%
27%
21%
NR
Deteriorate
22%
26%
18%
52%
NR
No Change
52%
56%
55%
34%
NR
n=
4Q08
65% 31%
Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
1Q09
23 9%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
n=
2Q09
52% 39%
No Change
3Q09 Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
115
Appendix 9E. Trend Analysis, Midwest Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
11
Banks
9%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
91%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
11
Business
18%
Commercial Real Estate
18%
Community Services
9%
Consumer
9%
Housing to Individuals
9%
Housing to Organizations
18%
Microenterprise
9%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
9% n=
11
Primarily Rural
18%
Primarily Urban
73%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
9% n=
Midwest
11 100%
Northeast
0%
South
0%
West
0%
Size
n=
11
Less than $10MM
27%
$10MM-50MM
36%
More than $50MM
36%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
116
Appendix 9E. Trend Analysis, Midwest Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
11 64% 18% 18%
11 73% 9% 18%
11 55% 18% 27%
n=
11 64% 9% 27% 9 3.3% 1.2% 4.0% 8.5%
11 55% 18% 27% 10 1.6% 1.3% 6.0% 8.8%
11 18% 36% 45% 11 3.6% 2.9% 4.5% 11.0%
9 0.5% 11 55% 9%
10 0.7% 11 55% 9%
11 0.3% 11 27% 36%
36%
36%
36%
11 55% 9%
9 56% 22%
10 50% 0%
36%
22%
50%
11 18% 9%
9 11% 0%
10 20% 10%
73% 11 36% 9% 55%
89% 11 27% 9% 64%
70% 11 18% 27% 55%
n=
n= n=
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
1Q09
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
2Q09
n=
n=
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
2Q09
1Q09
n=
11 18% 9% 73%
11 9% 9% 82%
11 27% 27% 45%
n=
11 36% 9% 55% 11 9% 9% 0% 82%
10 10% 20% 70% 11 18% 9% 18% 55%
11 45% 18% 36% 11 9% 0% 18% 73%
n=
11 18% 9% 73%
10 0% 10% 90%
11 45% 9% 45%
n=
11
10
11
45% 0% 55%
60% 20% 20%
64% 0% 36%
11
11
11
45% 9% 45%
27% 9% 64%
27% 0% 73%
11 27% 73%
11 18% 82%
11 27% 73%
n=
n=
n=
117
Appendix 9F. Trend Analysis, Northeast Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
13
Banks
0%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
100%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
Business
13 31%
Commercial Real Estate
8%
Community Services
8%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals
0%
Housing to Organizations
46%
Microenterprise
8%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
0% n=
13
Primarily Rural
23%
Primarily Urban
62%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
15% n=
Midwest
13 0%
Northeast
100%
South
0%
West
0%
Size
n=
13
Less than $10MM
23%
$10MM-50MM
38%
More than $50MM
38%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
118
Appendix 9F. Trend Analysis, Northeast Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
2Q09
1Q09
n=
13 31% 38% 31%
12 25% 33% 42%
12 58% 17% 25%
n=
13 31% 46% 23%
13 62% 15% 23%
13 31% 54% 15%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
13 1.9% 0.9% 4.6% 7.4%
13 2.3% 1.5% 4.3% 8.1%
13 2.7% 1.6% 4.3% 8.6%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
13 0.6% 13 54% 23%
13 1.2% 13 31% 46%
13 0.3% 13 46% 8%
23%
23%
46%
13 38% 8%
13 69% 8%
13 46% 8%
54%
23%
46%
13 15% 15%
13 46% 0%
13 38% 8%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
n=
n=
n=
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
69%
54%
54%
13 38% 15% 46%
13 23% 31% 46%
13 46% 15% 38%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
3Q09 Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Yes No
1Q09
n=
12 33% 17% 50%
12 17% 17% 67%
12 25% 17% 58%
n=
13 54% 23% 23%
13 23% 46% 31%
13 23% 62% 15%
n=
13 23% 0% 38% 38%
11 9% 9% 45% 55%
13 23% 0% 46% 31%
n=
13 15% 15% 69%
13 38% 23% 38%
13 31% 31% 38%
n=
13
13
13
77% 0% 23%
69% 15% 15%
62% 0% 38%
13
13
13
8% 38% 54%
8% 23% 69%
8% 62% 31%
11
13
12
18% 100%
15% 85%
17% 83%
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
n=
119
Appendix 9G. Trend Analysis Respondents, South Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
16
Banks
6%
Credit Unions
6%
Loan Funds
88%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
16
Business
6%
Commercial Real Estate
6%
Community Services
6%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals
13%
Housing to Organizations
38%
Microenterprise
13%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
6% n=
16
Primarily Rural
25%
Primarily Urban
38%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
38% n=
Midwest
0%
Northeast
0%
South
100%
West Size
16
0% n=
16
Less than $10MM
50%
$10MM-50MM
25%
More than $50MM
25%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
120
Appendix 9G. Trend Analysis, South Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
2Q09
1Q09
3Q09
n=
16 44% 0% 56%
16 63% 0% 38%
16 63% 13% 25%
Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
15 33% 7% 60%
16 69% 0% 31%
16 44% 13% 44%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
15 3.0% 1.7% 8.6% 13.4%
16 3.0% 2.3% 9.4% 14.7%
16 2.5% 1.7% 5.5% 9.7%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
15 1.0% 16 38% 19%
15 0.6% 16 31% 25%
16 0.6% 16 38% 13%
44%
44%
50%
16 31% 13%
16 38% 0%
16 44% 13%
56%
63%
44%
16 25% 6%
16 38% 13%
16 25% 13%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
69%
50%
63%
16 44% 13% 44%
16 56% 6% 38%
16 56% 19% 25%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
2Q09
1Q09
n=
15 27% 13% 60%
15 27% 27% 47%
12 58% 17% 25%
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
16 38% 13% 50%
16 25% 25% 50%
16 38% 25% 38%
Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
16 13% 19% 38% 31%
16 19% 19% 25% 38%
16 13% 6% 38% 44%
n=
16 0% 6% 94%
16 6% 25% 69%
16 13% 19% 69%
n=
16
16
16
75% 0% 25%
75% 0% 25%
63% 6% 31%
16
16
16
44% 13% 44%
38% 19% 44%
31% 25% 44%
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
n=
15
16
16
27% 73%
38% 63%
19% 81%
121
Appendix 9H. Trend Analysis Respondents, West Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09 Type
n=
7
Banks
0%
Credit Unions
0%
Loan Funds
100%
Venture Funds Financing Sector
0% n=
Business
7 14%
Commercial Real Estate
0%
Community Services
14%
Consumer
0%
Housing to Individuals
29%
Housing to Organizations
29%
Microenterprise
14%
Multiple/Other Urban/Rural Market
0% n=
7
Primarily Rural
14%
Primarily Urban
57%
Equally Rural/Urban Region
29% n=
7
Midwest
0%
Northeast
0%
South
0%
West Size Less than $10MM
100% n=
7 0%
$10MM-50MM
71%
More than $50MM
29%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
122
Appendix 9H. Trend Analysis, West Region 1stQ09 – 3rdQ09, Continued 3Q09 Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased No Change
2Q09
1Q09
3Q09
n=
7 86% 14% 0%
6 83% 0% 17%
6 67% 17% 17%
Ability to Access Capital (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
7 86% 14% 0%
7 71% 14% 14%
7 57% 29% 14%
Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total
n=
7 1.0% 0.1% 2.0% 3.1%
7 0.6% 0.2% 2.2% 3.0%
7 1.6% 0.8% 1.7% 4.0%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
n=
7 0.6% 7 57% 29%
7 0.4% 7 14% 57%
7 0.3% 7 71% 29%
14%
29%
0%
7 29% 29%
7 43% 14%
7 57% 14%
43%
43%
29%
7 29% 29%
7 29% 29%
7 43% 0%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
No Change Number of Loans/Investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased
n=
No Change Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
No Change LLR Ratio (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
n=
43% 7 57% 29% 14%
43% 7 29% 14% 57%
57% 7 57% 0% 43%
Opportunity Finance Network CDFI Market Conditions Report, Third Quarter 2009
2Q09
1Q09
n=
7 14% 14% 71%
5 20% 40% 20%
5 0% 60% 40%
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased No Change
n=
7 29% 57% 14%
7 14% 29% 57%
7 57% 14% 29%
Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased No Change OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
n=
7 14% 14% 29% 43%
7 29% 0% 0% 71%
7 14% 14% 14% 57%
n=
7 0% 0% 100%
7 29% 0% 71%
7 14% 0% 86%
n=
7
7
7
43% 0% 57%
71% 0% 29%
71% 0% 29%
7
7
7
29% 0% 71%
29% 14% 57%
0% 29% 71%
7 14% 86%
7 14% 86%
7 14% 86%
Increase Decrease No Change Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
Improve Deteriorate No Change Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes No
n=
123
