CDFI market conditions Q209
CDFI Market Conditions Report Second Quarter 2009 Published September 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 Second Quarter 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, differences by CDFI asset size, region, and financing sector, 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 fourth consecutive quarterly CDFI Market Conditions Survey conducted in July 2009, covering the second quarter (April – June) of 2009. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The second quarter of 2009 was a period of continued but slower economic decline. The national unemployment rate rose from 8.1% in the first quarter of 2009 to 9.2% at the end of the second quarter.1 The percentage of FDIC-insured institutions’ loans and leases 30 or more days past due fell slightly from 5.8% to 5.2% during the second quarter; however, the 90 day-plus nonaccrual rate continued to rise and remained at its highest level since 1991.2 Mortgages in foreclosure ticked up by 45 basis points to 4.3% and the delinquency rate for loans on one-to-four-unit mortgages rose by 12 basis points to a seasonally adjusted 9.24%, the highest since the Mortgage Bankers Association began tracking these data in 1972.3
CONTENTS
Executive Summary……………2 I.
Second Quarter 2009 Survey Results ………4
II.
Trend Analysis, Fourth Quarter 2008 and Second Quarter 2009 ...................…………7
Appendices: Appendix A. Summary Tables …………………………… 9 Appendix B. Financing Sector Definitions……………. 28 Appendix C. Definition of Regions and Divisions……..…29
In this challenging environment, demand for CDFI financing continued to rise as it had in the previous two quarters. A significant difference from previous quarters is the percentage of CDFIs that had an increase in loans and investments originated: half (51%) of CDFIs reported an increase in loans and investments originated in the second quarter compared to one-third in each of the previous two quarters. CDFI portfolio quality declined in the second quarter, with average portfolio at risk increasing from 9.2% at March 31, 2009 to 10.5% at June 30, 2009. This was after portfolio quality had improved in terms of both delinquencies and charge-offs from December 31, 2008 to March 31, 2009. Thirty-six percent of CDFIs increased their loan loss reserve ratio in 2nd quarter compared to 48% and 43% for the previous two quarters. This is a substantial decrease, but CDFIs have continued to manage
1 2
US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
1.85% of loans and leases were 30 – 89 days past due and 4.35% were noncurrent, defined as 90 or more days past due or in nonaccrual. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Quarterly Banking Profile, June 30 2009. 3
Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) National Delinquency Survey. 2
higher levels of risk, with 53% of CDFIs reporting that loan loss reserve ratios have stayed the same through the second quarter. Similar to the previous two quarters, just over half of CDFIs are capitalconstrained. CDFIs expect demand for financing to continue to increase. They expect continued operating and liquidity challenges due to insufficient capital, fewer operating grants, increasing loan loss reserve ratios, and higher cost of capital. At the same time, nearly half (47%) of CDFIs expect portfolio quality to remain the same and 29% expect it to improve; this is similar to the second quarter and is a considerable improvement over the fourth quarter when half expected portfolio quality to decrease.
3
I.
SECOND QUARTER 2009 SURVEY RESULTS
The Respondents A total of 128 CDFIs completed the 2ndQ09 survey, more than in any previous quarter. See Appendix C for respondent characteristics. Second Quarter 2009 Activity In this section, we include all CDFIs that responded to each question in each quarter. See Appendix A for quarterly responses from 3rdQ08 through 2ndQ09. Due to differences in the respondent pool in each quarter, comparisons across quarters are not precise. To provide a greater degree of comparability, a trend analysis that compares the subset of CDFIs that responded to the 4thQ08 and the 2ndQ09 surveys is provided in the next section. Demand continues to increase for most CDFIs: Similar to the previous quarter, 60% reported an increase in the number of financing applications received in 2ndQ09. Despite the general uptick, the number of groups that experienced increases in applications of 50% or more continues to trend downward, as 11% experienced increases of this magnitude versus 15% in 1stQ09 and 17% in 4thQ08. Sixteen percent of respondents reported decreases in the number of applications received; these CDFIs were concentrated in the Northeast. Figure 1. Demand and 2ndQ2009 (n = 126, 127)
loans. This was true among all sizes, regions, and primary financing sectors. Among the CDFIs whose originations did not keep pace with demand, the reasons were poor application quality (51%), the CDFI’s tightened underwriting criteria (41%), staff resources diverted to problem loans (31%), slower processing time due to additional due diligence (28%)%, and capital constraints (16%). This is a shift from the 1stQ09 when all of these reasons were reported equally Average portfolio-at-risk increased quarter-over-quarter: Respondents reported 10.5% portfolio at risk (31 or more days past due), up from 9.2% in the 2ndQ09. Poorer quality portfolios were heavily concentrated among Small CDFIs. Figure 2. Portfolio-at-Risk, 2ndQ2009 (n =128, 106, 105)
Originations, Housing development loans: Fifty-three of the 128 respondents finance housing development. Of these, 55% reported that their housing development loans were performing. Among the 45% that reported non-performing housing development loans, the reasons reported were challenges finding permanent take out financing (30%), changes in the Low Income Housing Tax market (25%), and other reasons (25%).
Originations increased significantly during the quarter: There was a significant uptick in the number of CDFIs reporting increases in originations during the quarter. Fifty-one percent of the respondents originated more
Charge-offs are on the rise: Similarly, quarterly net charge-offs rose to 1.1% versus 0.4% in the 1stQ09. Two respondents reported significant charge-offs due to non-performing housing development and business loans; without those two outliers, the net charge-off
4
rate is more in line with the prior quarter at 0.6%. Although delinquency has risen on average, more respondents reported a decrease in delinquency in the 2ndQ09 than in the 1stQ09: In the 2ndQ09, 30% of respondents reported that delinquency had fallen, significantly more than in the 1stQ09 (20%). The decreases were attributed equally to loan repayments, restructures, and charge-offs. Operating liquidity4: The amount of cash on hand to fund operations was fairly evenly distributed across four categories 90 day or less (22%), 91-180 days (33%), 181-365 days (22%), and greater than 365 days (22%). Thirteen respondents reported 30 days or less. One of these commented that this was typical for their business model and was not evidence of deterioration in financial condition. Workouts and extensions continue to rise: Nearly half (46%) of respondents reported an increase in the number of loans in workouts, slightly higher than 1stQ09 levels of 42%. Similarly, more CDFIs reported increases in extensions granted (44% in the 2ndQ09 vs. 38% in the 1stQ09). Increases for both workouts and extensions are disproportionately concentrated among CDFIs that primarily provide Consumer financing. Fewer CDFIs increased their loan loss reserves: Thirty-six percent of the respondents increased their loan loss reserves, down from 43% to 48% in the previous two quarters. A higher percentage of Large CDFIs and Consumer and Housing to Organizations CDFIs reported increases than other subgroups. More than half (53%) of respondents reported no change in their loan loss reserve ratio, up from 35% to 42% in the previous two quarters. These movements could be related to the higher net charge-offs during the quarter and/or the higher number of originations which presumably carry a lower reserve rate than troubled seasoned loans.
It should be noted that the adequacy of a CDFI’s cash on
4
hand is highly dependent on its primary type of financing and business model.
Liquidity constraints are steady: Similar to the previous two quarters, just over half (51%) of respondents report being capital constrained. For the first time since these data were reported, more CDFIs reported no change in liquidity (40%) than a decrease in liquidity (38%). The trend is similar for ability to access to capital. Although this trend looks promising, fewer CDFIs reported an increase in liquidity this quarter (22%) than in the previous quarter (29%). Figure 3. Access to Capital, Liquidity, and Cost of Borrowed Capital 2ndQ2009 (n= 127,127,126)
Outlook for the Next Quarter CDFIs expect demand for their financing to continue to rise: While a similar proportion expects increases in demand (70% in 2ndQ09 versus 73% 1stQ09), far fewer CDFIs anticipate a decline (4% for the current quarter versus 39% in the prior quarter). More CDFIs expect portfolio quality to improve in the coming quarter: 29% of respondents expect portfolio quality to improve, up from 25% in the second quarter. Liquidity: Like the previous quarter, the primary concerns of CDFIs that anticipate liquidity issues during the current year are increases in the cost of borrowed capital, fewer operating grants, funds being diverted to shore up reserves for problem loans, and bank investors not renewing loans and/or requiring security. One-third expect declines in net assets: Slightly fewer (33% vs. 36%) CDFIs expect a
5
decline in unrestricted net assets in the current fiscal year.
were undertaking new strategic planning efforts to respond to the market changes.
CDFI responses to operating/liquidity problems: To mitigate the effects of the current market, a majority of the respondents (79%) sought new grant funding and 41% reduced staff travel, professional development, or other operating expenses. Thirty percent froze salaries. Eleven CDFIs implemented salary cuts, with cuts ranging from 5% to 20%. CDFI responses to changing market conditions: A large majority of respondents (88%) are monitoring borrowers more closely in the 2nd quarter. Twenty-eight percent, less than previous quarters (38% in 1stQ09 and 30% in the 4thQ08), are developing new financing products to respond to changing market conditions. The new products cover a wide range. In addition to neighborhood stabilization and green loans, the most common new loans in previous quarters, in the 2ndQ09 CDFIs are developing New Markets Tax Credit loan products, new mortgage products, and a number of few loan products related to specific government financing programs. CDFI Fund Recovery Act Awards: Many CDFIs that applied for but did not receive a Recovery Act award are hoping to receive an award in the Fund’s September award announcements. The impact of not receiving a Recovery Act award varies greatly, from not moving ahead with planned new hires or geographic expansions to limiting lending activity and drastically reducing operating budgets. Those that received the awards will overwhelmingly use the funds for loan capital. A few awardees report using a portion of the award to fund loan loss reserves. A smaller number will use a portion for operations, including one that will use some of the award to regain position after a major loss. Important factors affecting the future: Several CDFIs reiterated that lack of access to new capital is affecting how they approach their work for future quarters. Many CDFIs also mentioned that state budget crises and reductions in state funding are influencing their planning for future quarters. A number of other CDFIs saw new market opportunities, and others
6
II. TREND ANALYSIS, FOURTH QUARTER 2008 AND SECOND QUARTER 2009
Figure 5. Originations, 2ndQ2009 (n = 65, 66)
This section provides trend analysis for the 67 CDFIs that responded to the 4thQ08 survey and the 2ndQ09 survey. We chose to exclude the 3rdQ08 because fewer CDFIs completed that survey and because several survey questions have changed. We excluded the 1stQ09 in order to maximize the sample size. The subset of 67 CDFIs is similar to the full set of respondents but includes proportionately more loan funds (93% vs. 86%), Housing to Organizations CDFIs (27% vs. 22%), and Northeast CDFIs (33% vs. 28%). The subset has proportionately fewer credit unions (3% vs. 9%), Business CDFIs (19% vs. 26%), and Consumer CDFIs (6% vs. 3%). Demand continued to rise: Similar to the larger set of respondents, the subset of 67 CDFIs experienced increases in demand between the 4thQ08 and the 2ndQ09. The subset started at a significantly higher level than the full sample (61% experienced an increase in demand in the 4thQ08 vs. 40% for the full sample) and the increase was relatively small (65% in 2ndQ09). Figure 4. Change in the Number Financing Applications Received, 4thQ2008 and 2ndQ2009 (n =66, 65)
and
Portfolio quality is improving for more CDFIs: In the 2ndQ09, more than one-third (36%) of CDFIs reported a drop in delinquencies. This is triple the percentage in the 4thQ08, when only 12% reported lower delinquency rates. The 67 CDFIs reported an average portfolio-atrisk of 11.1%. Unlike the full sample, the trend is an improvement in portfolio quality, with portfolio at risk down from 11.8% in the 4thQ09. Figure 6. Delinquencies, 4thQ2008 and 2ndQ2009 (n = 65, 66)
of
4thQ2008
Originations increased significantly: Like the full sample, far more CDFIs originated more loans in the 2ndQ09 than in the 4thQ08. Of the 58% that experienced upswings in originations in 2ndQ09, nearly one-third reported increases over 50%. Additionally, only 15% had a decrease in originations compared to 25% in 4thQ08.
Workouts and extensions are flattening: In the 2ndQ08, nearly half of CDFIs reported no change in the number of loans/investments in workout and slightly more than half reported no change in the number of term extensions granted. In the 4thQ08, far more CDFIs reported increases in these indicators.
7
Figure 7. Workouts, 4thQ2008 and 2ndQ2009 (n =67, 66)
Capital liquidity is steadying: The percentage of CDFIs reporting no change in capital liquidity jumped from 30% to 41% and fewer CDFIs reported a decrease in liquidity (33% in the 2ndQ09 vs. 40% in the 1stQ09). Figure 10. Capital Liquidity 4thQ2008 and 2ndQ2009 (n = 67, 66)
Figure 8. Term Extensions, 4thQ2008 and 2ndQ2009 (n = 66, 65)
Loan loss reserve ratios steadied: Fewer CDFIs reported an increase in loan loss reserve ratios in 2ndQ09 (33%) than in 4thQ08 (42%). More than half (56%) reported no change from 4thQ08 levels. Figure 9. LLR 4thQ2008 and 2ndQ2009 (n = 65, 66)
8
APPENDIX A. SUMMARY TABLES Appendix A presents the results of the four quarterly surveys conducted to date (3rd quarter 2008 through 2nd quarter 2009). Results are presented for: All Respondents (Tables A1, A2) Trend Respondents (Tables A3, A4) Each Asset Class (Tables A7 - A9) Each Financing Sector (Tables A10 - A15) Each Region (Tables A16 through A19) Tables A5 and A6 provide the financing sector composition of each asset class and each region.
9
Table A1 All Respondents All Type
n=
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
128
106
118
69
128
106
118
67
Banks
2%
3%
1%
0%
Credit Unions
9%
6%
5%
7%
86%
87%
92%
91%
3%
5%
3%
1%
Loan Funds Venture Funds Financing Sector
n=
Business Commercial Real Estate Community Services Consumer Housing to Individuals Housing to Organizations
128
102
118
68
26%
32%
23%
26%
2%
6%
2%
0%
11%
9%
6%
7%
6%
3%
5%
0%
15%
13%
15%
13% 26%
22%
22%
27%
Microenterprise
16%
12%
19%
0%
Multiple/Other
2%
4%
3%
26%
128
102
118
69
Primarily Rural
32%
29%
28%
25%
Primarily Urban
50%
53%
52%
36%
Equally Rural/Urban
18%
18%
20%
39%
Urban/Rural Market
Region
n=
128
106
118
68
Midwest
23%
22%
19%
31%
Northeast
28%
26%
30%
34%
South**
28%
30%
26%
10%
West
21%
22%
25%
25%
Portfolio Size Assets < $10MM Assets between $1050MM
n=
n=
128
106
114*
NR
48%
42%
54%
NR
35%
36%
30%
NR
Assets > $50MM 17% 22% 17% NR NR = Not reported. *The 4thQ08 survey did not collect Asset Size. 4thQ08 Asset Size is estimated based on portfolio outstanding. **Includes Puerto Rico.
10
Table A2 All Respondents Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
Ability to Access to Capital (%) 126
104
116
68
Increased
60%
59%
63%
51%
Decreased
16%
17%
19%
19%
Stayed the Same
25%
24%
18%
30%
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
All Respondents
3Q08
n=
n=
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
103
82
93
NR
Increased
18%
23%
19%
NR
Decreased
34%
40%
40%
NR
Stayed the Same
48%
37%
41%
NR
127
106
118
NR
Increased
22%
29%
28%
NR
Decreased
38%
39%
42%
NR
40%
32%
31%
NR
Capital Liquidity (%) n=
2Q09
n=
127
106
115
NR
Increased
51%
33%
48%
NR
Decreased
16%
34%
30%
NR
33%
33%
23%
NR
128
106
118
NR
128
106
105
NR
Debt
13%
16%
15%
NR
31-60 days
3.1%
2.7%
2.7%
NR
Equity
15%
9%
14%
NR
61-90 days
1.5%
1.8%
1.7%
NR
Both
23%
25%
25%
NR
90+ days
5.9%
4.8%
6.7%
NR
Neither
49%
49%
47%
NR
10.5%
9.2%
11.1%
NR
%=
1.1%
0.4%
1.7%*
NR
n=
126
105
116
68
Increased
32%
33%
52%
38%
Decreased
30%
20%
9%
14%
Stayed the Same
38%
47%
39%
48%
Stayed the Same Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Total Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Days Cash on Hand (#)
81
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
22%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
33%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
22%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
22%
NR
NR
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
n=
124
105
117
68
Increased
46%
42%
56%
39%
Decreased
10%
9%
4%
3%
44%
50%
40%
58%
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
126
105
116
NR
Increased
n=
14%
14%
15%
NR
Decreased
16%
16%
13%
NR
Stayed the Same
70%
70%
72%
NR
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing(%)
122
102
116
NR
Increased
n=
70%
73%
83%
NR
Decreased
4%
4%
5%
NR
25%
24%
12%
NR
128
102
115**
Improve
29%
25%
26%
NR
Deteriorate
24%
25%
57%
NR
47%
51%
30%
NR
124
100
113
33%
36%
37%
NR
No 67% 64% 63% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. ** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
Yes n=
Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
124
104
116
NR
44%
38%
51%
NR
6%
5%
3%
NR
49%
57%
46%
NR
127
105
116
NR
Increased
36%
48%
43%
NR
Decreased
11%
10%
12%
NR
Stayed the Same
53%
42%
45%
NR
11
Table A3 Trend Respondents vs. Full Sample
Trend Respondents
Full 2Q09 Sample
All
n=
67
128
Type Banks
n=
67 0.0%
128 2.3%
3.0% 92.5% 4.5%
8.6% 85.9% 3.1%
67 19.4% 1.5% 13.4% 3.0%
128 25.8% 2.3% 10.9% 6.3%
14.9% 26.9% 19.4% 1.5%
14.8% 21.9% 15.6% 2.3%
67
128
26.9% 52.2% 20.9%
32.0% 50.0% 18.0%
67 20.9% 32.8%
128 22.7% 28.1%
South (including Puerto Rico)
26.9%
28.1%
West
19.4%
21.1%
Credit Unions Loan Funds Venture Funds Financing Sector Business Commercial Real Estate Community Services Consumer
n=
Housing to Individuals Housing to Organizations Microenterprise Multiple/Other
Urban/Rural Market
n=
Primarily Rural Primarily Urban Equally Rural/Urban
Region Midwest Northeast
n=
12
Table A4
Trend Analysis Number of Financing Applications Received (%) Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%) Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Portfolio-at-Risk 31-60 days 61-90 days 90+ days Total Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%) Increased Decreased
2Q09
n=
65 65% 14% 22%
66 61% 15% 24%
n=
66 58% 15% 27% 64 3.1% 1.4% 6.6% 11.1%
65 42% 25% 34% 59 3.0% 1.8% 6.9% 11.8%
61 0.7% 66 29% 36%
59* 1.3% 65 51% 12%
35%
37%
66 44% 8%
67 58% 3%
48%
39%
65 40% 8%
66 55% 3%
52%
42%
66 33% 11% 56%
65 42% 14% 45%
n=
n= %= n=
Stayed the Same Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%) Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%) Increased Decreased
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%) Increased Decreased Stayed the Same
4Q08
n=
n=
n=
Trend Analysis Ability to Access to Capital (%) Increased Decreased Stayed the Same
Capital Liquidity (%) Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%) Debt Equity Both Neither Average Cost of Borrowed Capital Increased Decreased Stayed the Same OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing(%)
Increased Decreased Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%) Improve Deteriorate Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
2Q09
4Q08
n=
56 20% 34% 46%
56 20% 38% 43%
n=
66 26% 33% 41%
67 30% 40% 30%
n=
67 18% 15% 21% 46%
67 16% 15% 24% 45%
n=
66 17% 18% 65%
65 14% 18% 68%
n=
67
67
73% 3% 24%
84% 4% 12%
67
66**
28% 22% 49%
29% 64% 26%
66
65
n=
n=
Yes 29% 34% No 71% 66% *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. ** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
13
Table A5
n=
Business
Commercial Real Estate
Community Services / Facilities Financing
Small
61
52%
0%
29%
63%
53%
30%
80%
25%
48%
Medium
45
36%
33%
43%
38%
42%
41%
20%
0%
35%
Large
22
12%
67%
29%
0%
5%
30%
0%
75%
17%
Housing to Individuals
Housing to Organizations
Microenterprise
Other
Total
Consumer
Housing to Individuals
Housing to Organizations
Microenterprise
Other
Total
Table A6
n=
Business
Commercial Real Estate
Community Services / Facilities Financing
Midwest
29
21%
33%
29%
38%
21%
15%
25%
25%
23%
Northeast
36
39%
33%
29%
13%
26%
22%
25%
25%
28%
South
36
27%
33%
36%
13%
16%
41%
25%
25%
28%
West
27
12%
0%
7%
38%
37%
22%
25%
25%
21%
Consumer
14
Table A7 Asset Size - Small * Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
44
60
Increased
62%
64%
73%
Decreased
16%
11%
15%
Stayed the Same
21%
25%
12%
60
45
59
Increased
40%
38%
61%
Decreased
18%
24%
22%
Stayed the Same
42%
38%
17%
55
37
50
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
Asset Size - Small
4Q08
61
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
2Q09
4Q08
46
34
44
Increased
24%
32%
18%
Decreased
39%
38%
36%
Stayed the Same
37%
29%
45%
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
61
45
61
Increased
26%
33%
23%
Decreased
44%
31%
46%
30%
36%
31%
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
61
45
61
8%
9%
10%
31-60 days
4.2%
4.0%
3.6%
Debt
61-90 days
2.1%
2.4%
2.2%
Equity
21%
4%
13%
90+ days
7.6%
4.2%
8.8%
Both
25%
27%
23%
Neither
46%
60%
54%
Total
13.9%
10.6%
14.6%
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
49
40
52**
60
44
60
1.1%
0.5%
3.0%
Increased
12%
11%
12%
60
44
61
Decreased
13%
11%
7%
Increased
30%
27%
41%
Stayed the Same
75%
77%
82%
Decreased
28%
16%
11%
OUTLOOK
42%
57%
48%
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
45
NR
NR
0-90 days
n=
29%
NR
NR
91-180 days
29%
NR
NR
181-365 days
11%
NR
NR
9%
NR
NR
59
44
60
Increased
46%
36%
48%
Decreased
10%
5%
3%
44%
59%
48%
58
43
60
Increased
43%
35%
48%
Decreased
2%
2%
2%
55%
63%
50%
60
44
61
Increased
40%
34%
36%
Decreased
10%
2%
15%
Stayed the Same
50%
64%
49%
greater than 365 Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
n=
n=
58
42
60
Increased
n=
69%
76%
87%
Decreased
3%
2%
3%
28%
21%
10%
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
61
42
60***
Improve
38%
36%
27%
Deteriorate
21%
19%
48%
41%
45%
37%
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes
n=
n=
58
41
58
34%
41%
33%
No 66% 59% 67% NR = Not reported. * Asset Size was reported beginning with the 1stQ09 survey. In the 4thQ08 survey, portfolio outstanding was reported and was used to estimate asset size. Size was not reported in the 3rdQ08 survey. **4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. *** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
15
Table A8 Asset Size – Medium* Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
37
34
Increased
60%
59%
53%
Decreased
11%
16%
21%
Stayed the Same
29%
24%
26%
45
38
33
Increased
67%
39%
48%
Decreased
13%
29%
33%
Stayed the Same
20%
32%
18%
40
35
31
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
Asset Size - Medium
4Q08
45
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
2Q09
4Q08
37
28
31
Increased
11%
21%
16%
Decreased
30%
43%
39%
Stayed the Same
59%
36%
45%
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
44
38
34
Increased
20%
29%
41%
Decreased
36%
47%
35%
43%
24%
24%
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
45
38
34
16%
21%
21%
31-60 days
1.5%
1.8%
1.6%
Debt
61-90 days
1.0%
1.4%
1.4%
Equity
11%
18%
15%
90+ days
4.2%
5.3%
5.3%
Both
18%
24%
29%
8.3%
Neither
56%
37%
35%
Total
6.8%
8.4%
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
38
35
33**
45
38
34
1.5%
0.5%
0.6%
Increased
13%
13%
21%
44
38
34
Decreased
16%
18%
12%
Increased
25%
32%
62%
Stayed the Same
71%
68%
68%
Decreased
34%
21%
3%
41%
47%
35%
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (%)
n=
32
NR
NR
0-90 days
16%
NR
NR
91-180 days
28%
NR
NR
181-365 days
25%
NR
NR
greater than 365
28%
NR
NR
44
38
34
43%
34%
59%
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
n=
n=
Increased
Decreased
7%
8%
3%
50%
58%
38%
45
38
34
Increased
47%
47%
56%
Decreased
9%
5%
3%
44%
47%
41%
45
38
34
Increased
27%
61%
44%
Decreased
9%
13%
3%
64%
26%
53%
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
Stayed the Same
n=
n=
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
43
37
33
Increased
n=
77%
76%
85%
Decreased
5%
8%
9%
19%
16%
6%
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
45
37
33***
Improve
20%
22%
33%
Deteriorate
29%
30%
61%
51%
49%
24%
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
Yes
44
37
34
36%
35%
50%
No 64% 65% 50% NR = Not reported. * Asset Size was reported beginning with the 1stQ09 survey. In the 4thQ08 survey, portfolio outstanding was reported and was used to estimate asset size. Size was not reported in the 3rdQ08 survey. **4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. *** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
16
Table A9 Asset Size – Large* Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
23
18
Increased
50%
48%
44%
Decreased
25%
30%
28%
Stayed the Same
25%
22%
28%
22
23
19
Increased
50%
13%
16%
Decreased
14%
61%
42%
Stayed the Same
36%
26%
42%
20
22
17
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
Asset Size - Large
4Q08
20
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
2Q09
4Q08
20
20
16
Increased
20%
10%
25%
Decreased
30%
40%
50%
Stayed the Same
50%
50%
25%
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
22
23
19
Increased
14%
22%
26%
Decreased
23%
39%
37%
64%
39%
37%
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
22
23
19
23%
22%
26%
31-60 days
3.2%
1.9%
2.0%
Debt
61-90 days
1.0%
1.3%
1.0%
Equity
5%
4%
5%
90+ days
4.8%
4.8%
3.1%
Both
27%
26%
26%
Total
9.0%
8.0%
6.1%
Neither
45%
48%
42%
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
20
23
18**
21
23
19
0.3%
0.3%
0.2%
Increased
24%
22%
16%
22
23
19
Decreased
24%
22%
32%
Increased
50%
48%
68%
Stayed the Same
52%
57%
53%
Decreased
27%
26%
11%
OUTLOOK
23%
26%
21%
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
15
NR
NR
0%
NR
NR
91-180 days
33%
NR
NR
181-365 days
33%
NR
NR
greater than 365
33%
NR
NR
21
23
19
Increased
52%
65%
74%
Decreased
19%
17%
5%
29%
17%
21%
21
23
19
Increased
43%
30%
47%
Decreased
14%
9%
11%
Stayed the Same
43%
61%
42%
22
23
19
Increased
45%
52%
63%
Decreased
18%
22%
16%
Stayed the Same
36%
26%
21%
0-90 days
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
n=
n=
n=
n=
21
23
19
Increased
n=
62%
61%
68%
Decreased
5%
0%
0%
33%
39%
32%
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
22
23
19***
Improve
23%
9%
16%
Deteriorate
23%
26%
74%
55%
65%
26%
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%) Yes
n=
n=
22
22
17
23%
27%
24%
No 77% 73% 76% NR = Not reported. * Asset Size was reported beginning with the 1stQ09 survey. In the 4thQ08 survey, portfolio outstanding was reported and was used to estimate asset size. Size was not reported in the 3rdQ08 survey. **4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. *** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
17
Table A10 SECTOR BUSINESS Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
4Q08
33
28
16
Increased
58%
58%
79%
50%
Decreased
15%
12%
4%
28%
Stayed the Same
27%
30%
18%
22%
33
33
28
NR
Increased
42%
39%
61%
NR
Decreased
12%
27%
14%
NR
Stayed the Same
45%
33%
25%
NR
28
28
23
NR
31-60 days
3.7%
2.7%
2.6%
NR
61-90 days
1.8%
1.5%
1.8%
NR
90+ days
4.7%
5.8%
7.6%
NR
10.1%
10.0%
12.0%
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
24
33
24*
16
1.7%
0.5%
0.9%
NR
32
31
24
NR
Increased
34%
38%
52%
28%
Decreased
38%
9%
4%
11%
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
28%
53%
44%
61%
22
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
27%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
41%
NR
NR
NR
n=
181-365 days
18%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
14%
NR
NR
NR
33
33
29
16
Increased
55%
45%
48%
38%
Decreased
9%
3%
0%
0%
36%
52%
52%
72%
32
32
27
16
Increased
38%
41%
41%
NR
Decreased
6%
0%
4%
NR
56%
59%
56%
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
n=
2Q09
3Q08
33
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
32
32
27
NR
Increased
38%
53%
41%
NR
Decreased
16%
9%
11%
NR
Stayed the Same
47%
38%
48%
NR
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
4Q08
3Q08
30
27
21
NR
Increased
30%
22%
14%
NR
Decreased
33%
44%
38%
NR
Stayed the Same
37%
33%
48%
NR
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
33
33
29
NR
Increased
30%
27%
24%
NR
Decreased
27%
45%
45%
NR
42%
27%
31%
NR
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
Debt Equity
33
33
29
NR
3%
9%
7%
NR
9%
9%
14%
NR
Both
33%
27%
34%
NR
Neither
55%
55%
45%
NR
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
33
32
28
NR
Increased
n=
18%
13%
14%
NR
Decreased
21%
13%
0%
NR
Stayed the Same
61%
75%
86%
NR
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
31
33
28
NR
Increased
74%
73%
100%
NR
Decreased
0%
27%
0%
NR
26%
0%
0%
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
33
33
27**
NR
Improve
21%
18%
19%
NR
Deteriorate
27%
33%
63%
NR
52%
48%
30%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
32
33
28
NR
34%
30%
29%
NR
No 66% 70% 71% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. ** Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Yes
18
Table A11 SECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09 n=
Increased
1Q09
4Q08
5
Increased
8%
0%
0%
NR
40%
Decreased
38%
29%
40%
NR
Stayed the Same
54%
71%
60%
NR
14
9
7
NR
36%
33%
14%
60% Capital Liquidity (%)
14
9
7
NR
Increased
14%
0%
14%
NR
11%
43%
NR
Decreased
29%
22%
43%
NR
57%
78%
43%
NR
14
9
7
NR
21%
22%
14%
NR
0%
0%
0%
NR
Both
14%
0%
29%
NR
Neither
64%
78%
57%
NR
33%
14%
21%
56%
43%
NR
13
8
6
NR
31-60 days
2.5%
1.2%
1.2%
NR
61-90 days
0.4%
0.3%
0.1%
NR
90+ days
4.5%
4.5%
5.8%
NR
Total
7.4%
5.9%
7.6%
NR
13
8
6*
NR
0.5%
0.0%
0.7%
NR
14
9
7
5
Increased
29%
11%
43%
0%
Decreased
14%
22%
0%
20%
57%
67%
57%
80%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
NR
NR
NR
0%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
50%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
13%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
38%
NR
NR
NR
14
9
7
5
14%
22%
71%
40%
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
n=
Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
7%
0%
0%
0%
79%
78%
29%
60%
n=
Debt Equity
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
14
9
7
NR
Increased
n=
14%
22%
14%
NR
Decreased
21%
22%
43%
NR
Stayed the Same
64%
56%
43%
NR
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
14
9
6
NR
Increased
79%
56%
100%
NR
Decreased
21%
11%
0%
NR
0%
33%
0%
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
14
9
7
NR
Improve
29%
0%
14%
NR
Deteriorate
29%
11%
57%
NR
43%
89%
29%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
13
8
7
NR
8%
25%
29%
NR
No 92% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs.
75%
71%
NR
Yes n=
Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
NR
8
0-90 days
n=
71% 7% n=
n=
NR
7
Stayed the Same
Stayed the Same
5
86%
0%
Decreased
7
3Q08
9
0%
n=
13
4Q08
67% 0%
Increased
n=
1Q09
14 14%
Portfolio-at-Risk
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
50%
Decreased Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
2Q09
3Q08
14
9
7
NR
29%
11%
57%
NR
7%
0%
0%
NR
64%
89%
43%
NR
14
9
7
NR
Increased
21%
56%
29%
NR
Decreased
14%
11%
14%
NR
Stayed the Same
64%
33%
57%
NR
19
Table A12 SECTOR - CONSUMER Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
4Q08
NR
6
NR
Increased
38%
NR
17%
NR
Decreased
25%
NR
67%
NR
Stayed the Same
38%
NR
17%
NR
8
NR
5
NR
Increased
25%
NR
17%
NR
Decreased
38%
NR
67%
NR
Stayed the Same
38%
NR
17%
NR
8
NR
NR
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
2Q09
3Q08
8
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
4
NR
3
NR
NR
33%
NR
Decreased
25%
NR
0%
NR
Stayed the Same
75%
NR
67%
NR
8
NR
6
NR
Increased
38%
NR
33%
NR
Decreased
38%
NR
33%
NR
25%
NR
33%
NR
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
31-60 days
2.7%
NR
NR
NR
61-90 days
2.2%
NR
NR
NR
Equity
90+ days
1.5%
NR
NR
NR
Both
NR
Neither
Net Charge-Offs (%)
6.4% n=
Net Charge-Offs (%) Delinquency Rate (%)
NR
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
67%
NR
6
NR
0%
NR
Decreased
13%
NR
17%
NR
Stayed the Same
88%
NR
83%
NR
NR
OUTLOOK
63%
NR
33%
NR
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
7
NR
5
NR
Increased
n=
29%
NR
60%
NR
Decreased
0%
NR
0%
NR
71%
NR
40%
NR
5
NR
NR
NR
80%
NR
NR
NR
0%
NR
NR
NR
0%
NR
NR
NR
8
NR
5
NR
20%
NR
NR
NR
Improve
38%
NR
0%
NR
Deteriorate
13%
NR
40%
NR
50%
NR
60%
NR
7
NR
6
NR
Increased
57%
NR
50%
NR
Decreased
14%
NR
17%
NR
29%
NR
33%
NR
8
NR
6
NR
Increased
63%
NR
67%
NR
Decreased
0%
NR
0%
NR
38%
NR
33%
NR
6
NR
n=
NR
NR
NR
Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
NR
63%
NR
17%
Stayed the Same
NR
17%
8
50%
n=
17%
NR
0%
NR
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
NR
0%
Increased
NR
n=
38%
NR
25%
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
NR
NR
13%
greater than 365
NR
0%
6*
Decreased
181-365 days
6
NR
3.4%
Increased
91-180 days
NR
NR
NR
n=
8 0%
NR
6
0-90 days
n=
7
NR
n=
n=
1.0% 8
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
NR
3Q08
0%
Debt
Total
4Q08
Increased
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
8
NR
Increased
50%
NR
67%
NR
Decreased
13%
NR
17%
NR
Stayed the Same
38%
NR
17%
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
6
NR
6
NR
83%
NR
67%
NR
No 17% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs.
NR
33%
NR
Yes
20
Table A13 SECTOR - HOUSING TO INDIVIDUALS Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
4Q08
7%
NR
64%
NR
45%
27%
29%
NR
18
13
18
NR
Increased
17%
23%
28%
NR
Decreased
39%
46%
56%
NR
44%
31%
17%
NR
19
13
18
NR
Debt
16%
23%
39%
NR
Equity
32%
15%
0%
NR
NR
Both
21%
23%
22%
NR
Neither
32%
38%
39%
NR
63%
62%
47%
12%
Decreased
16%
23%
35%
25%
Stayed the Same
21%
15%
18%
63%
18
13
18
NR
Increased
39%
46%
50%
NR
Decreased
22%
38%
28%
NR
Stayed the Same
39%
15%
22%
NR
14
12
15
NR
31-60 days
8.1%
1.5%
4.4%
NR
61-90 days
3.6%
1.2%
3.0%
NR
n=
91+ days
7.0%
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
Decreased Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
9.7%
18.7%
4.4%
12.7%
NR
13
12
14*
NR
0.1%
Increased
1.7%
0.2%
1.9%
13
18
9
46%
61%
50%
44%
15%
33%
38%
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
NR
91-180 days
46%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
0%
NR
NR
NR
8%
NR
NR
18
13
17
9
44%
31%
47%
43%
Decreased
11%
23%
12%
0%
44%
46%
41%
57%
Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
18
13
18
NR
28%
31%
28%
NR
0%
0%
0%
NR
72%
69%
72%
NR
n=
n=
18
13
17
NR
11%
8%
18%
NR
6%
31%
12%
NR
83%
62%
71%
NR
17
13
18
NR
71%
85%
78%
NR
Decreased
0%
8%
11%
NR
29%
8%
11%
NR
19
13
18**
NR
Improve
21%
46%
28%
NR
Deteriorate
42%
15%
61%
NR
37%
38%
22%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
18
13
18
NR
50%
38%
50%
NR
No 50% 62% 50% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Yes
19
13
18
NR
Increased
21%
46%
22%
NR
Decreased
0%
8%
11%
NR
79%
46%
67%
NR
Stayed the Same
n=
Increased Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
NR
Increased
n=
Stayed the Same
12%
NR
Stayed the Same
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
6%
NR
Decreased
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
38%
46%
n=
Capital Liquidity (%)
17%
0-90 days
Increased
Stayed the Same
OUTLOOK
NR
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
45%
Decreased
18 39%
NR
n=
9%
Decreased
NR
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Increased
Increased
13
greater than 365
11
n=
3Q08
55%
Increased
11
4Q08
18%
9
n=
1Q09
NR
17
Portfolio-at-Risk
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
14
13
n=
2Q09
3Q08
19
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
21
Table A14 SECTOR - HOUSING TO ORGANIZATIONS Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
4Q08
21
33
16
Increased
50%
57%
52%
44%
Decreased
19%
24%
24%
17%
Stayed the Same
31%
19%
24%
39%
28
22
33
NR
Increased
61%
23%
30%
NR
Decreased
11%
41%
39%
NR
Stayed the Same
29%
36%
30%
NR
27
22
31
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
2Q09
3Q08
26
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
4Q08
3Q08
24
15
28
NR
Increased
13%
40%
21%
NR
Decreased
33%
27%
39%
NR
Stayed the Same
54%
33%
39%
NR
28
22
33
NR
Increased
14%
45%
33%
NR
Decreased
46%
32%
33%
NR
39%
23%
33%
NR
Capital Liquidity (%)
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
1Q09
n=
n=
28
22
33
NR
21%
18%
18%
NR
31-60 days
1.1%
2.1%
1.4%
NR
Debt
61-90 days
0.7%
1.7%
0.9%
NR
Equity
11%
9%
21%
NR
90+ days
6.6%
5.7%
4.5%
NR
Both
29%
41%
21%
NR
Neither
39%
32%
39%
NR
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
9.6%
6.1%
NR
27
22
32*
NR
1.5% n=
Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
8.4%
n=
0.5%
0.2%
28
22
33
NR
NR
Increased
21%
23%
15%
NR
Decreased
14%
14%
24%
NR
Stayed the Same
64%
64%
61%
NR
28
22
33
16
18%
41%
45%
39%
36%
18%
12%
6%
46%
41%
42%
55%
22
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
5%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
9%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
50%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365 Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
36%
NR
28
22
33
NR
Increased
64%
68%
70%
NR
Decreased
11%
5%
6%
NR
25%
27%
24%
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
22
33**
NR
NR
18%
24%
NR
Deteriorate
18%
32%
55%
NR
54%
50%
36%
NR
22
33
16
45%
55%
44%
Decreased
11%
18%
3%
0%
39%
36%
42%
56%
28
22
33
NR
Increased
57%
50%
55%
NR
Decreased
14%
23%
9%
NR
Stayed the Same
29%
27%
36%
NR
n=
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
28
28
Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
OUTLOOK
29%
50%
n=
n=
Improve
Increased Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
NR
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
28
22
33
NR
Increased
43%
50%
52%
NR
Decreased
14%
14%
9%
NR
Stayed the Same
43%
36%
39%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
28
21
32
NR
39%
29%
38%
NR
No 61% 71% 63% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Yes
n=
22
Table A15 SECTOR MICROENTERPRISE Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
Ability to Access to Capital (%) 20
11
22
NR
Increased
80%
73%
77%
NR
Decreased
10%
9%
9%
NR
Stayed the Same
10%
18%
14%
NR
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
2Q09
3Q08
n=
n=
4Q08
3Q08
15
8
19
NR
Increased
27%
63%
32%
NR
Decreased
27%
13%
32%
NR
Stayed the Same
47%
25%
37%
NR
20
12
22
NR
Increased
15%
33%
23%
NR
Decreased
55%
25%
45%
NR
30%
42%
32%
NR
20
12
22
NR
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
n=
20
12
21
NR
Increased
50%
42%
67%
NR
Decreased
20%
42%
24%
NR
30%
17%
10%
NR
20
12
22
NR
Debt
20%
25%
9%
NR
31-60 days
2.5%
7.3%
3.8%
NR
Equity
15%
17%
14%
NR
61-90 days
1.4%
4.4%
2.1%
NR
Both
10%
8%
18%
NR
90+ days
9.3%
7.0%
10.1%
NR
Neither
55%
50%
59%
NR
13.2%
18.7%
15.9%
NR
20
12
22
NR
18
12
21*
NR
Increased
5%
8%
9%
NR
1.2%
1.1%
4.9%
NR
Decreased
15%
17%
5%
NR
Stayed the Same
80%
75%
86%
NR
Stayed the Same Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Total Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
n=
20
12
22
NR
Increased
45%
50%
50%
NR
Decreased
40%
17%
18%
NR
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
15%
33%
32%
NR
14
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
57%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
29%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
7%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
7%
NR
NR
NR
20
12
22
NR
Increased
45%
58%
68%
NR
Decreased
15%
8%
5%
NR
40%
33%
27%
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
n=
Increased Decreased Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
n=
20
12
22
NR
65%
58%
73%
NR
5%
0%
0%
NR
30%
42%
27%
NR
20
12
22
NR
Increased
40%
67%
41%
NR
Decreased
10%
0%
18%
NR
Stayed the Same
50%
33%
41%
NR
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
n=
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
20
12
22
NR
Increased
80%
92%
95%
NR
Decreased
5%
0%
0%
NR
15%
8%
5%
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
20
12
22**
NR
Improve
50%
58%
50%
NR
Deteriorate
15%
17%
55%
NR
35%
25%
23%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
20
12
20
NR
Yes
n=
30%
25%
25%
NR
No
70%
75%
75%
NR
NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
23
Table A16 REGION - MIDWEST Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
1Q09
4Q08
Ability to Access to Capital (%) 29
23
22
21
Increased
72%
61%
68%
62%
Decreased
7%
17%
18%
5%
n=
21%
22%
14%
33%
Stayed the Same Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
2Q09
3Q08
23
20
20
NR
20%
35%
NR
Decreased
35%
40%
15%
NR
Stayed the Same
43%
40%
50%
NR
28
23
22
NR
Increased
n=
25%
35%
36%
NR
Decreased
29%
35%
27%
NR
46%
30%
36%
NR
23
21
NR
Increased
55%
26%
52%
NR
Decreased
10%
43%
29%
NR
Stayed the Same
34%
30%
19%
NR
27
21
21
NR
Debt
31-60 days
3.5%
2.9%
2.5%
NR
Equity
61-90 days
1.6%
1.9%
2.0%
NR
Both
90+ days
3.6%
2.9%
5.1%
NR
Neither
62%
Total
8.7%
7.7%
9.7%
NR
28
n=
27
23
20*
NR
Increased
11%
%=
0.5%
0.6%
1.2%
NR
Decreased
14%
n=
29
23
22
21
Stayed the Same
75%
Increased
45%
26%
41%
24%
Decreased
28%
30%
14%
19%
28%
43%
45%
57%
Net Charge-Offs (%) Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
22
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
41%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
23%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
23%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
14%
NR
NR
NR
27
22
22
21
Increased
37%
45%
45%
33%
Decreased
15%
5%
0%
5%
48%
50%
55%
62%
28
22
21
NR
Increased
36%
36%
48%
NR
Decreased
0%
5%
5%
NR
64%
59%
48%
NR
29
23
22
NR
Increased
28%
39%
18%
NR
Decreased
10%
17%
23%
NR
Stayed the Same
62%
43%
59%
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
n=
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
n=
3Q08
22%
29
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
4Q08
Increased
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
n=
29
23
22
NR
7%
9%
9%
NR
7%
4%
23%
NR
24%
26%
18%
NR
61%
50%
NR
23
22
NR
22%
14%
NR
9%
14%
NR
70%
73%
NR
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
27
23
22
NR
Increased
70%
83%
91%
NR
Decreased
7%
0%
9%
NR
22%
17%
0%
NR
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
29
23
22**
NR
Improve
31%
22%
27%
NR
Deteriorate
24%
17%
45%
NR
45%
61%
27%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
Yes
28
23
21
NR
25%
35%
38%
NR
No 75% 65% 62% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
24
NR
Table A17 REGION - NORTHEAST Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09 n=
Increased
1Q09
4Q08
3Q08
2Q09 Ability to Access to Capital (%)
27
35
15
31
23
25
NR
19%
57%
40%
Increased
16%
17%
16%
NR
32%
43%
56%
NR
52%
39%
28%
NR
29%
52%
26%
27%
Stayed the Same
34%
30%
17%
33%
Stayed the Same
n=
Increased Decreased
35
28
34
NR
36
28
35
NR
37%
36%
41%
NR
Increased
22%
14%
23%
NR
NR
Decreased
47%
57%
60%
NR
31%
29%
17%
NR
26%
39%
38%
37%
25%
21%
NR
33
25
28
NR
31-60 days
4.4%
4.0%
2.9%
NR
61-90 days
1.8%
1.7%
1.8%
NR
90+ days
6.1%
6.1%
7.3%
NR
12.3%
11.8%
12.0%
NR
Stayed the Same Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
n=
3Q08
35
Decreased Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
4Q08
37%
Decreased
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
36
28
35
NR
Debt
14%
25%
20%
NR
Equity
19%
11%
11%
NR
Both
25%
29%
31%
NR
Neither
42%
36%
37%
NR
35
28
34
NR
Increased
20%
18%
21%
NR
Decreased
20%
25%
9%
NR
Stayed the Same
60%
57%
71%
NR
34
27
35
NR
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
n=
36
25
27*
NR
1.7%
0.2%
1.1%
NR
36
28
34
15
Increased
28%
32%
50%
33%
Decreased
39%
14%
21%
13%
33%
54%
29%
53%
23
NR
NR
NR
Increased
65%
67%
77%
NR
26%
NR
NR
NR
Decreased
6%
0%
3%
NR
29%
33%
20%
NR
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
n=
0-90 days 91-180 days
39%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
13%
NR
NR
NR
greater than 365
22%
NR
NR
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
35
28
35
14
Increased
51%
36%
63%
21%
Decreased
11%
7%
6%
0%
37%
57%
31%
79%
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
n=
35
28
35
NR
Increased
46%
39%
49%
NR
Decreased
6%
4%
3%
NR
49%
57%
49%
NR
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
36
28
34
NR
Increased
n=
36%
46%
50%
NR
Decreased
11%
7%
18%
NR
Stayed the Same
53%
46%
32%
NR
n=
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
n=
36
27
34**
NR
Improve
22%
22%
18%
NR
Deteriorate
25%
37%
74%
NR
53%
41%
26%
NR
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
34
25
35
NR
29%
24%
43%
NR
No 71% 76% 57% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Yes
25
Table A18 REGION - SOUTH Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09
4Q08
32
30
15
Increased
53%
47%
60%
47%
Decreased
14%
22%
10%
33%
Stayed the Same
33%
31%
30%
20%
36
32
30
NR
Increased
56%
31%
57%
NR
Decreased
14%
25%
20%
NR
Stayed the Same
31%
44%
23%
NR
31
28
26
NR
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
2Q09
3Q08
36
Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
n=
1Q09
Ability to Access to Capital (%)
4Q08
3Q08
31
23
25
NR
Increased
19%
35%
8%
NR
Decreased
35%
30%
36%
NR
Stayed the Same
45%
35%
56%
NR
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
36
32
31
NR
Increased
25%
34%
26%
NR
Decreased
31%
31%
32%
NR
44%
34%
42%
NR
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
36
32
31
NR
14%
13%
13%
NR
31-60 days
2.2%
2.1%
2.8%
NR
Debt
61-90 days
1.8%
1.5%
2.2%
NR
Equity
17%
9%
16%
NR
90+ days
9.8%
5.4%
9.9%
NR
Both
28%
31%
19%
NR
NR
Neither
42%
47%
52%
NR
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
13.8% n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
15.0%
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
31
29
24*
NR
36
32
31
NR
0.5%
0.4%
1.8%
NR
Increased
14%
9%
6%
NR
Decreased
17%
16%
23%
NR
Stayed the Same
69%
75%
71%
NR
35
32
31
15
Increased
37%
28%
48%
47%
Decreased
23%
16%
0%
13%
OUTLOOK
40%
56%
52%
40%
Expected Demand for Financing (%)
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
9.1%
35
30
31
NR
Increased
n=
80%
67%
84%
NR
Decreased
0%
7%
6%
NR
20%
27%
10%
NR
26
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
27%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
31%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
15%
NR
NR
NR
36
30
30**
NR
greater than 365
27%
NR
NR
NR
Improve
42%
27%
40%
NR
36
32
30
15
Deteriorate
22%
23%
53%
NR
47%
44%
63%
53%
36%
50%
33%
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
n=
n=
n=
Increased
Decreased
8%
9%
10%
0%
44%
47%
27%
47%
36
32
31
NR
Increased
42%
38%
55%
NR
Decreased
11%
9%
6%
NR
Stayed the Same
47%
53%
39%
NR
36
32
31
NR
Increased
44%
53%
52%
NR
Decreased
8%
13%
6%
NR
47%
34%
42%
NR
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
Stayed the Same
n=
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
35
30
30
NR
40%
40%
37%
NR
No 60% 60% 63% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Yes
n=
26
Table A19 REGION - WEST Number of Financing Applications Received (%)
2Q09 n=
1Q09
4Q08
26
22
29
16
Increased
85%
82%
69%
56%
Decreased
12%
9%
21%
19%
4%
9%
10%
25%
27
23
30
NR
Increased
59%
39%
43%
NR
Decreased
11%
30%
30%
NR
Stayed the Same
30%
30%
27%
NR
24
20
24
NR
Stayed the Same Number of Loans/Investments Originated (%)
Portfolio-at-Risk
n=
n=
2Q09
3Q08 Ability to Access to Capital (%)
4Q08
3Q08
18
16
23
NR
Increased
17%
19%
22%
NR
Decreased
33%
50%
48%
NR
Stayed the Same
50%
31%
30%
NR
Capital Liquidity (%)
n=
1Q09
27
23
30
NR
Increased
15%
35%
30%
NR
Decreased
44%
30%
40%
NR
41%
35%
30%
NR
Stayed the Same Capital-Constrained (%)
n=
n=
27
23
30
NR
19%
17%
10%
NR
31-60 days
2.0%
1.5%
2.5%
NR
Debt
61-90 days
0.7%
2.1%
0.7%
NR
Equity
15%
13%
13%
NR
90+ days
3.4%
3.9%
4.0%
NR
Both
11%
13%
27%
NR
NR
Neither
56%
57%
50%
NR
Total Net Charge-Offs (%)
6.1% n=
Net Charge-Offs Delinquency Rate (%)
7.2%
24
21
24*
NR
27
22
29
NR
0.5%
3.4%
NR
Increased
11%
9%
17%
NR
Decreased
11%
14%
7%
NR
Stayed the Same
78%
77%
76%
NR
22
29
16
Increased
15%
50%
66%
56%
Decreased
31%
23%
3%
6%
54%
27%
31%
38%
n=
OUTLOOK Expected Demand for Financing (%)
26
22
30
NR
Increased
n=
65%
77%
83%
NR
Decreased
4%
9%
3%
NR
31%
14%
13%
NR
21
NR
NR
NR
0-90 days
33%
NR
NR
NR
91-180 days
24%
NR
NR
NR
181-365 days
29%
NR
NR
NR
27
22
29**
NR
greater than 365
14%
NR
NR
NR
Improve
19%
27%
21%
NR
26
23
30
15
Deteriorate
26%
18%
52%
NR
46%
43%
47%
53%
56%
55%
34%
NR
Number of Loans/investments in Workout (%)
n=
Average Cost of Borrowed Capital
0.4% 26
Stayed the Same Days Cash on Hand (#)
n=
7.5%
n=
Increased
Decreased
8%
13%
0%
0%
46%
43%
53%
47%
25
22
29
NR
Increased
56%
41%
52%
NR
Decreased
8%
0%
0%
NR
36%
59%
48%
NR
26
22
29
NR
Increased
35%
50%
45%
NR
Decreased
15%
5%
3%
NR
Stayed the Same
50%
45%
52%
NR
Stayed the Same Number of Loans Given Term Extensions (%)
n=
Stayed the Same Loan Loss Reserve Ratio (%)
Stay the Same Expected Change in Portfolio Quality (%)
Stay the Same Anticipate a Decline in Unrestricted Net Assets in Current FY (%)
n=
n=
27
22
27
NR
37%
45%
30%
NR
No 63% 55% 70% NR = Not reported. *4thQ08 figure is gross charge offs. **Percentages add up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to provide multiple responses.
NR
Yes
n=
27
APPENDIX B. FINANCING SECTOR DEFINITIONS Business: Business financing includes financing to for-profit and non-profit businesses that have more than 5 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, homebased or otherwise) should not be included here but with the Housing or Community Services sector.
Housing to 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.)
Commercial Real Estate: Business financing includes financing for construction, rehabilitation, acquisition or expansion of nonresidential property used for office, retail, or industrial purposes.
Housing to 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.
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.
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.
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.
Other: Other includes any activities not covered in the sectors defined here (includes financing to other CDFIs).
28
APPENDIX C. REGIONS AND DIVISIONS Regions and divisions in the report are defined by the Census Bureau. 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 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 Note: In regional breakouts within this report, Puerto Rico is included in the South Region.
29
