PROVIDENT FINANCIAL HOLDINGS INC - Quarter Report: 2010 March (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
(Mark
One)
[ X
]
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For
the quarterly period ended ……………………………………..... March
31, 2010
|
[ ]
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For
the transition period from ________________ to
_________________
|
Commission
File Number 000-28304
PROVIDENT FINANCIAL
HOLDINGS, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware |
33-0704889
|
(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization) | Identification No.) |
3756 Central Avenue,
Riverside, California 92506
(Address
of principal executive offices and zip code)
(951)
686-6060
(Registrant’s telephone
number, including area code)
.
(Former
name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last
report)
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes X .No .
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this
chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes .No .
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”,
“accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer [ ] | Accelerated filer [ ] | Non-accelerated filer [ ] | ||
Smaller reporting company [ X ] |
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes . No X .
APPLICABLE
ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS
Indicate
the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common
stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Title of
class:
|
As of May 3, 2010 |
Common stock, $ 0.01 par value, per share | 11,406,654 shares |
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
Table
of Contents
PART
1 -
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
||
ITEM
1 -
|
Financial
Statements. The Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated
Financial
Statements
of Provident Financial Holdings, Inc. filed as a part of the report are as
follows:
|
||
Page
|
|||
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
|
|||
as
of March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2009
|
1
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations
|
|||
for
the Quarters and Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
|
2
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity
|
|||
for
the Quarters and Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
|
3
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|||
for
the Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
|
5
|
||
Notes
to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
6
|
||
ITEM
2 -
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of
|
||
Operations:
|
|||
General
|
21
|
||
Safe-Harbor
Statement
|
21
|
||
Critical
Accounting Policies
|
22
|
||
Executive
Summary and Operating Strategy
|
23
|
||
Off-Balance
Sheet Financing Arrangements and Contractual Obligations
|
24
|
||
Comparison
of Financial Condition at March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2009
|
25
|
||
Comparison
of Operating Results
|
|||
for
the Quarters and Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
|
27
|
||
Asset
Quality
|
38
|
||
Loan
Volume Activities
|
45
|
||
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
|
46
|
||
Commitments
and Derivative Financial Instruments
|
47
|
||
Supplemental
Information
|
48
|
||
ITEM
3 -
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
48
|
|
ITEM
4 -
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
50
|
|
PART
II -
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
||
ITEM
1 -
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
50
|
|
ITEM 1A -
|
Risk
Factors
|
50
|
|
ITEM
2 -
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
51
|
|
ITEM
3 -
|
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
|
51
|
|
ITEM
4 -
|
(Removed
and Reserved)
|
52
|
|
ITEM
5 -
|
Other
Information
|
52
|
|
ITEM
6 -
|
Exhibits
|
52
|
|
SIGNATURES
|
54
|
||
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
(Unaudited)
Dollars
in Thousands
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
|||
2010
|
2009
|
|||
Assets
|
||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ 86,018
|
$ 56,903
|
||
Investment
securities – available for sale, at fair value
|
36,406
|
125,279
|
||
Loans
held for investment, net of allowance for loan losses of
|
||||
$50,849
and $45,445, respectively
|
1,033,014
|
1,165,529
|
||
Loans
held for sale, at fair value
|
155,800
|
135,490
|
||
Loans
held for sale, at lower of cost or market
|
-
|
10,555
|
||
Accrued
interest receivable
|
4,540
|
6,158
|
||
Real
estate owned, net
|
17,555
|
16,439
|
||
Federal
Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) – San Francisco stock
|
33,023
|
33,023
|
||
Premises
and equipment, net
|
5,952
|
6,348
|
||
Prepaid
expenses and other assets
|
33,012
|
23,889
|
||
Total
assets
|
$
1,405,320
|
$
1,579,613
|
||
|
||||
Liabilities
and Stockholders’ Equity
|
||||
Liabilities:
|
||||
Non
interest-bearing deposits
|
$ 47,773
|
$ 41,974
|
||
Interest-bearing
deposits
|
900,144
|
947,271
|
||
Total
deposits
|
947,917
|
989,245
|
||
Borrowings
|
309,658
|
456,692
|
||
Accounts
payable, accrued interest and other liabilities
|
23,375
|
18,766
|
||
Total
liabilities
|
1,280,950
|
1,464,703
|
||
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
||||
Stockholders’
equity:
|
||||
Preferred
stock, $.01 par value (2,000,000 shares authorized;
none
issued and outstanding)
|
||||
-
|
-
|
|||
Common
stock, $.01 par value (40,000,000 and 15,000,000 shares
authorized, respectively; 17,610,865 and 12,435,865 shares
issued, respectively; 11,406,654 and 6,219,654 shares
outstanding, respectively)
|
||||
176
|
124
|
|||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
85,488
|
72,709
|
||
Retained
earnings
|
132,295
|
134,620
|
||
Treasury
stock at cost (6,204,211 and 6,216,211 shares,
respectively)
|
||||
(93,942
|
) |
(93,942
|
)
|
|
Unearned
stock compensation
|
(271
|
) |
(473
|
)
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income, net of tax
|
624
|
1,872
|
||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
124,370
|
114,910
|
||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$ 1,405,320
|
$
1,579,613
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
1
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
In
Thousands, Except Per Share Information
|
|||||||||||
Quarter
Ended
March
31,
|
Nine
Months Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||||
2010
|
2009
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
Interest
income:
|
|||||||||||
Loans
receivable, net
|
$
16,101
|
$
18,850
|
$
51,375
|
$
59,156
|
|||||||
Investment
securities
|
311
|
1,635
|
1,869
|
5,344
|
|||||||
FHLB
– San Francisco stock
|
22
|
-
|
91
|
324
|
|||||||
Interest-earning
deposits
|
71
|
6
|
191
|
16
|
|||||||
Total
interest income
|
16,505
|
20,491
|
53,526
|
64,840
|
|||||||
Interest
expense:
|
|||||||||||
Checking
and money market deposits
|
376
|
282
|
1,066
|
914
|
|||||||
Savings
deposits
|
468
|
484
|
1,492
|
1,588
|
|||||||
Time
deposits
|
2,738
|
4,479
|
9,838
|
16,047
|
|||||||
Borrowings
|
3,330
|
4,575
|
11,854
|
14,086
|
|||||||
Total
interest expense
|
6,912
|
9,820
|
24,250
|
32,635
|
|||||||
Net
interest income, before provision for loan losses
|
9,593
|
10,671
|
29,276
|
32,205
|
|||||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
2,322
|
13,541
|
21,843
|
35,809
|
|||||||
Net
interest income (expense), after provision for
loan
losses
|
7,271
|
(2,870
|
)
|
7,433
|
(3,604
|
)
|
|||||
Non-interest
income:
|
|||||||||||
Loan
servicing and other fees
|
219
|
91
|
637
|
605
|
|||||||
Gain
on sale of loans, net
|
1,431
|
6,107
|
9,804
|
8,692
|
|||||||
Deposit
account fees
|
667
|
684
|
2,135
|
2,219
|
|||||||
Gain
on sale of investment securities, net
|
-
|
-
|
2,290
|
356
|
|||||||
Gain
(loss) on sale and operations of real estate
owned acquired in the settlement of loans, net
|
58
|
(952
|
)
|
247
|
(1,838
|
)
|
|||||
Other
|
502
|
457
|
1,458
|
1,153
|
|||||||
Total
non-interest income
|
2,877
|
6,387
|
16,571
|
11,187
|
|||||||
Non-interest
expense:
|
|||||||||||
Salaries
and employee benefits
|
6,065
|
5,025
|
16,848
|
14,175
|
|||||||
Premises
and occupancy
|
740
|
695
|
2,282
|
2,129
|
|||||||
Equipment
|
334
|
340
|
1,025
|
1,097
|
|||||||
Professional
expenses
|
424
|
294
|
1,177
|
986
|
|||||||
Sales
and marketing expenses
|
174
|
93
|
434
|
393
|
|||||||
Deposit
insurance premiums and regulatory
assessments
|
636
|
403
|
2,309
|
1,013
|
|||||||
Other
|
1,175
|
1,098
|
3,595
|
2,758
|
|||||||
Total
non-interest expense
|
9,548
|
7,948
|
27,670
|
22,551
|
|||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
600
|
(4,431
|
)
|
(3,666
|
)
|
(14,968
|
)
|
||||
Provision
(benefit) for income taxes
|
229
|
(1,861
|
)
|
(1,579
|
)
|
(6,216
|
)
|
||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ 371
|
$ (2,570
|
)
|
$ (2,087
|
)
|
$ (8,752
|
)
|
||||
Basic
earnings (loss) per share
|
$
0.03
|
$
(0.41
|
)
|
$
(0.26
|
)
|
$
(1.41
|
)
|
||||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per share
|
$
0.03
|
$
(0.41
|
)
|
$
(0.26
|
)
|
$
(1.41
|
)
|
||||
Cash
dividends per share
|
$
0.01
|
$ 0.03
|
$ 0.03
|
$ 0.13
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
2
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity
(Unaudited)
Dollars
in Thousands
For
the Quarters Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Unearned
Stock
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income,
|
|||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Stock
|
Compensation
|
Net
of Tax
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Balance
at January 1, 2010
|
11,395,454
|
$
176
|
$
85,111
|
$
132,038
|
$
(93,942
|
)
|
$
(338
|
)
|
$ 587
|
$
123,632
|
||||||
Comprehensive
income:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
371
|
371
|
||||||||||||||
Change
in unrealized holding gain on
investment
securities available for
sale,
net of tax
|
37
|
37
|
||||||||||||||
Total
comprehensive income
|
408
|
|||||||||||||||
Common
stock issuance, net of expenses
|
(26
|
)
|
(26
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Distribution
of restricted stock
|
11,200
|
|||||||||||||||
Amortization
of restricted stock
|
235
|
235
|
||||||||||||||
Stock
options expense
|
186
|
186
|
||||||||||||||
Allocations
of contribution to ESOP (1)
|
(18
|
)
|
67
|
49
|
||||||||||||
Cash
dividends
|
(114
|
)
|
(114
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2010
|
11,406,654
|
$
176
|
$
85,488
|
$
132,295
|
$
(93,942
|
)
|
$
(271
|
)
|
$ 624
|
$
124,370
|
(1)
|
Employee
Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”).
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Unearned
Stock
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income,
|
|||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Stock
|
Compensation
|
Net
of Tax
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Balance
at January 1, 2009
|
6,208,519
|
$
124
|
$
74,943
|
$
136,251
|
$
(93,930
|
)
|
$
-
|
$
466
|
$
117,854
|
|||||||
Comprehensive
loss:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
(2,570
|
)
|
(2,570
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Change
in unrealized holding gain on
investment
securities available for
sale,
net of tax
|
798
|
798
|
||||||||||||||
Total
comprehensive loss
|
(1,772
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Purchase
of treasury stock (1)
|
(65
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Distribution
of restricted stock
|
11,200
|
|||||||||||||||
Amortization
of restricted stock
|
112
|
112
|
||||||||||||||
Forfeiture
of restricted stock
|
12
|
(12
|
)
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Stock
options expense
|
185
|
185
|
||||||||||||||
Cash
dividends
|
(187
|
)
|
(187
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2009
|
6,219,654
|
$
124
|
$
75,252
|
$
133,494
|
$
(93,942
|
)
|
$
-
|
$
1,264
|
$
116,192
|
(1)
|
All
of which are repurchases made to satisfy the minimum income tax required
to be withheld from employees in connection with the vesting of restricted
stock granted to them pursuant to the Corporation’s share-based
compensation plans.
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
3
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity
(Unaudited)
Dollars
in Thousands
For
the Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Unearned
Stock
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
(Loss),
|
|||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Stock
|
Compensation
|
Net
of Tax
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Balance
at July 1, 2009
|
6,219,654
|
$
124
|
$
72,709
|
$
134,620
|
$
(93,942
|
)
|
$ (
473
|
)
|
$
1,872
|
$
114,910
|
||||||
Comprehensive
loss:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
(2,087
|
)
|
(2,087
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Change
in unrealized holding loss on
investment
securities available for
sale,
net of reclassification of $1.3
million
of net gain included in net
loss,
net of tax
|
(1,248
|
)
|
(1,248
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Total
comprehensive loss
|
(3,335
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Common
stock issuance, net of expenses
|
5,175,000
|
52
|
11,881
|
11,933
|
||||||||||||
Distribution
of restricted stock
|
12,000
|
|||||||||||||||
Amortization
of restricted stock
|
446
|
446
|
||||||||||||||
Stock
options expense
|
413
|
413
|
||||||||||||||
Allocations
of contribution to ESOP
|
39
|
202
|
241
|
|||||||||||||
Cash
dividends
|
(238
|
)
|
(238
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2010
|
11,406,654
|
$
176
|
$
85,488
|
$
132,295
|
$
(93,942
|
)
|
$
(271
|
)
|
$ 624
|
$
124,370
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Unearned
Stock
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income,
|
|||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Stock
|
Compensation
|
Net
of Tax
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Balance
at July 1, 2008
|
6,207,719
|
$
124
|
$
75,164
|
$
143,053
|
$
(94,798
|
)
|
$ (
102
|
)
|
$
539
|
$
123,980
|
||||||
Comprehensive
loss:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
(8,752
|
)
|
(8,752
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Change
in unrealized holding gain on
investment
securities available for
sale,
net of reclassification of
$206
of net gain included in net
loss,
net of tax
|
725
|
725
|
||||||||||||||
Total
comprehensive loss
|
(8,027
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Purchase
of treasury stock (1)
|
(65
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Distribution
of restricted stock
|
12,000
|
|||||||||||||||
Amortization
of restricted stock
|
320
|
320
|
||||||||||||||
Awards
of restricted stock
|
(868
|
)
|
868
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Forfeiture
of restricted stock
|
12
|
(12
|
)
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Stock
options expense
|
554
|
554
|
||||||||||||||
Allocations
of contribution to ESOP
|
70
|
102
|
172
|
|||||||||||||
Cash
dividends
|
(807
|
)
|
(807
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2009
|
6,219,654
|
$
124
|
$
75,252
|
$
133,494
|
$
(93,942
|
)
|
$
-
|
$
1,264
|
$
116,192
|
(1)
|
All
of which are repurchases made to satisfy the minimum income tax required
to be withheld from employees in connection with the vesting of restricted
stock granted to them pursuant to the Corporation’s share-based
compensation plans.
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
4
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited
- In Thousands)
Nine
Months Ended
March
31,
|
|||||
2010
|
2009
|
||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|||||
Net
loss
|
$ (2,087
|
)
|
$ (8,752
|
)
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used for)
|
|||||
operating
activities:
|
|||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,214
|
1,565
|
|||
Provision
for loan losses
|
21,843
|
35,809
|
|||
Provision
for losses on real estate owned
|
419
|
226
|
|||
Gain
on sale of loans, net
|
(9,804
|
)
|
(8,692
|
)
|
|
Gain
on sale of investment securities, net
|
(2,290
|
)
|
(356
|
)
|
|
(Gain)
loss on sale of real estate owned, net
|
(2,042
|
)
|
109
|
||
Stock-based
compensation
|
1,097
|
1,019
|
|||
FHLB
– San Francisco stock dividend
|
-
|
(804
|
)
|
||
Decrease
(increase) in current and deferred income taxes
|
1,249
|
(9,991
|
)
|
||
Increase
in cash surrender value of the bank owned life insurance
|
(149
|
)
|
(92
|
)
|
|
(Decrease)
increase in accounts payable and other liabilities
|
(1,371
|
)
|
2,015
|
||
(Increase)
decrease in prepaid expenses and other assets
|
(7,722
|
)
|
1,961
|
||
Loans
originated for sale
|
(1,315,799
|
)
|
(701,044
|
)
|
|
Proceeds
from sale of loans
|
1,323,764
|
620,464
|
|||
Net
cash provided by (used for) operating activities
|
8,322
|
(66,563
|
)
|
||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|||||
Decrease
in loans held for investment, net
|
78,743
|
89,067
|
|||
Maturity
and call of investment securities available for sale
|
2,000
|
65
|
|||
Principal
payments from investment securities available for sale
|
19,106
|
24,973
|
|||
Purchase
of investment securities available for sale
|
-
|
(8,135
|
)
|
||
Proceeds
from sale of investment securities available for sale
|
67,778
|
480
|
|||
Purchase
of the bank owned life insurance
|
(2,000
|
)
|
-
|
||
Proceeds
from sale of real estate owned
|
32,118
|
24,622
|
|||
Purchase
of premises and equipment
|
(288
|
)
|
(675
|
)
|
|
Net
cash provided by investing activities
|
197,457
|
130,397
|
|||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|||||
Decrease
in deposits, net
|
(41,328
|
)
|
(64,463
|
)
|
|
Repayments
of short-term borrowings, net
|
-
|
(81,400
|
)
|
||
Proceeds
from long-term borrowings
|
-
|
130,000
|
|||
Repayments
of long-term borrowings
|
(147,034
|
)
|
(50,032
|
)
|
|
ESOP
loan payment
|
3
|
8
|
|||
Cash
dividends
|
(238
|
)
|
(807
|
)
|
|
Proceeds
from issuance of common stock
|
11,933
|
-
|
|||
Net
cash used for financing activities
|
(176,664
|
)
|
(66,694
|
)
|
|
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
29,115
|
(2,860
|
)
|
||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
56,903
|
15,114
|
|||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ 86,018
|
$ 12,254
|
|||
Supplemental
information:
|
|||||
Cash
paid for interest
|
$
24,723
|
$
32,335
|
|||
Cash
paid for income taxes
|
$ 2,040
|
$ 2,599
|
|||
Transfer
of loans held for sale to loans held for investment
|
$ -
|
$ 1,004
|
|||
Real
estate acquired in the settlement of loans
|
$
45,051
|
$
41,636
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
5
PROVIDENT
FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
March
31, 2010
Note
1: Basis of Presentation
The
unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements included herein
reflect all adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary to
present a fair statement of the results of operations for the interim periods
presented. All such adjustments are of a normal, recurring
nature. The condensed consolidated financial statements at June 30,
2009 are derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Provident
Financial Holdings, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Provident Savings
Bank, F.S.B. (the “Bank”) (collectively, the “Corporation”). Certain
information and note disclosures normally included in financial statements
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America (“GAAP”) have been omitted pursuant to the rules and
regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) with respect to
interim financial reporting. It is recommended that these unaudited
interim condensed consolidated financial statements be read in conjunction with
the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in the
Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30,
2009. The results of operations for the quarter and nine months ended
March 31, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of results that may be expected
for the entire fiscal year ending June 30, 2010.
Note
2: Recent Accounting Pronouncements
ASC 105:
In June
2009, the FASB issued ASC 105, “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles,” a
replacement of previous statement, “The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles.” The FASB Accounting Standards Codification
(“Codification”) is the source of authoritative GAAP recognized by the FASB to
be applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive
releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under authority of
federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC
registrants. On the effective date of this ASC, the Codification will
supersede all then-existing non-SEC accounting and reporting
standards. All other non-grandfathered non-SEC accounting literature
not included in the Codification will become non-authoritative. ASC
105 is effective for interim and annual financial statements issued after
September 15, 2009. The Corporation adopted this Statement on July 1,
2009, which did not have a material impact on the Corporation’s consolidated
financial statements in terms of Codification references.
ASC 810:
In June
2009, the FASB issued ASC 810, “Consolidation,” to improve financial reporting
by enterprises involved with variable interest entities (“VIEs”). ASC
810 addresses: (1) the effects on certain provisions of ASC 810-10-05-8,
“Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities,” as a result of the elimination of
the qualifying special purpose entity (“SPE”) concept in ASC 860, and (2)
constituent concerns about the application of certain key provisions of ASC
810-10-05-8, including those in which the accounting and disclosures under ASC
810-10-05-8 do not always provide timely and useful information about an
enterprise’s involvement in a VIE. ASC 810 is effective at the
beginning of each reporting entity’s first annual reporting period that begins
after November 15, 2009, for interim periods within that first annual reporting
period, and for interim and annual periods thereafter. Early adoption is
prohibited. The Corporation will be required to adopt ASC 810 on July
1, 2010, and has not yet assessed the impact of the adoption of this standard on
the Corporation’s consolidated financial statements.
ASC 860:
In June
2009, the FASB issued ASC 860, “Transfers and Servicing.” This
statement is to improve the relevance, representational faithfulness, and
comparability of the information that a reporting entity provides in its
financial statements about a transfer of financial assets; the effects of a
transfer on its financial position, financial performance and cash flows; and a
transferor’s continuing involvement, if any, in transferred financial
assets. ASC 860 is effective at the beginning of each reporting
entity’s first annual reporting period that begins after November 15, 2009, for
interim periods within that first annual reporting period, and for interim and
annual periods thereafter. Early adoption is prohibited. This
statement must be applied to transfers occurring on or after the effective
date. However, the disclosure provisions of this statement should be
applied to transfers that occurred both before and
6
after the
effective date. Additionally, on and after the effective date, the
concept of a qualifying SPE is no longer relevant for accounting
purposes. Therefore, formerly qualifying SPEs, as defined under
previous accounting standards, should be evaluated for consolidation by
reporting entities on and after the effective date in accordance with the
applicable consolidation guidance. The Corporation will be required
to adopt ASC 810 on July 1, 2010, and has not yet assessed the impact of the
adoption of this standard on the Corporation’s consolidated financial
statements.
ASC
715-20-65-2:
In
December 2008, the FASB issued ASC 715-20-65-2, “Employer’s Disclosures about
Postretirement Benefit Plan Assets,” which amends ASC 715-20, “Employer’s
Disclosures about Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits,” to provide
guidance on employers’ disclosures about plan assets of a defined benefit
pension or other postretirement plan. The objectives of the
disclosures are to provide users of financial statements with an understanding
of the plan investment policies and strategies regarding investment allocation,
major categories of plan assets, use of fair valuation inputs and techniques,
effect of fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs (i.e.,
level 3 inputs), and significant concentrations of risk within plan
assets. ASC 715-20-65-2 is effective for financial statements issued
for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, with early adoption
permitted. This ASC does not require comparative disclosures for
earlier periods. Management has not determined the impact of this ASC on the
Corporation’s consolidated financial statements.
Note
3: Earnings (Loss) Per Share and Stock-Based Compensation
Earnings
(Loss) Per Share:
Basic
earnings per share (“EPS”) excludes dilution and is computed by dividing income
or loss available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of
shares outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS reflects the potential
dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock
were exercised or converted into common stock or resulted in the issuance of
common stock that would then share in the earnings of the entity. As
of March 31, 2010 and 2009, there were outstanding options to purchase 905,200
shares and 905,500 shares of the Corporation’s common stock, respectively, of
which 905,200 shares and 905,500 shares, respectively, were excluded from the
diluted EPS computation as their effect was anti-dilutive. As of
March 31, 2010 and 2009, there was outstanding unvested restricted stock of
124,300 shares and 136,300 shares, respectively, also excluded from the diluted
EPS computation as their effect was anti-dilutive.
7
The
following table provides the basic and diluted EPS computations for the quarters
and nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
For
the Quarter
Ended
March
31,
|
For
the Nine Months
Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||
(In
Thousands, Except Earnings (Loss) Per Share)
|
|||||||||
2010
|
2009
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||
Numerator:
|
|||||||||
Net
income (loss) – numerator for basic earnings
(loss)
per share and diluted earnings (loss)
per
share - available to common stockholders
|
$
371
|
$
(2,570
|
)
|
$
(2,087
|
)
|
$
(8,752
|
)
|
||
Denominator:
|
|||||||||
Denominator
for basic earnings (loss) per share:
Weighted-average
shares
|
|||||||||
11,326
|
6,215
|
8,115
|
6,201
|
||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Denominator
for diluted earnings (loss) per share:
|
|||||||||
Adjusted
weighted-average shares
and
assumed conversions
|
11,326
|
6,215
|
8,115
|
6,201
|
|||||
Basic
earnings (loss) per share
|
$
0.03
|
$
(0.41
|
)
|
$
(0.26
|
)
|
$
(1.41
|
)
|
||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per share
|
$
0.03
|
$
(0.41
|
)
|
$
(0.26
|
)
|
$
(1.41
|
)
|
ASC 718,
“Compensation – Stock Compensation,” requires companies to recognize in the
statement of operations the grant-date fair value of stock options and other
equity-based compensation issued to employees and
directors. Effective July 1, 2005, the Corporation adopted ASC 718
using the modified prospective method under which the provisions of ASC 718 are
applied to new awards and to awards modified, repurchased or cancelled after
June 30, 2005 and to awards outstanding on June 30, 2005 for which requisite
service has not yet been rendered.
Note
4: Operating Segment Reports
The
Corporation operates in two business segments: community banking through the
Bank and mortgage banking through Provident Bank Mortgage (“PBM”), a division of
the Bank.
8
The
following tables set forth condensed consolidated statements of operations and
total assets for the Corporation’s operating segments for the quarters ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively (in thousands).
For
the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
|
||||||
Provident
|
||||||
Provident
|
Bank
|
Consolidated
|
||||
Bank
|
Mortgage
|
Totals
|
||||
Net
interest income, before provision for loan
losses
|
$
8,909
|
$ 684
|
$
9,593
|
|||
Provision
for loan losses
|
2,059
|
263
|
2,322
|
|||
Net
interest income, after provision for loan losses ..
|
6,850
|
421
|
7,271
|
|||
Non-interest
income:
|
||||||
Loan
servicing and other fees
|
207
|
12
|
219
|
|||
(Loss)
gain on sale of loans, net
|
(15
|
)
|
1,446
|
1,431
|
||
Deposit
account fees
|
667
|
-
|
667
|
|||
Gain
on sale and operations of real estate
owned
acquired in the settlement of loans, net
|
25
|
33
|
58
|
|||
Other
|
502
|
-
|
502
|
|||
Total
non-interest income
|
1,386
|
1,491
|
2,877
|
|||
Non-interest
expense:
|
||||||
Salaries
and employee benefits
|
3,581
|
2,484
|
6,065
|
|||
Premises
and occupancy
|
569
|
171
|
740
|
|||
Operating
and administrative expenses
|
1,574
|
1,169
|
2,743
|
|||
Total
non-interest expense
|
5,724
|
3,824
|
9,548
|
|||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
2,512
|
(1,912
|
)
|
600
|
||
Provision
(benefit) for income taxes
|
1,033
|
(804
|
)
|
229
|
||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
1,479
|
$
(1,108
|
)
|
$ 371
|
||
Total
assets, end of period
|
$
1,250,341
|
$
154,979
|
$
1,405,320
|
9
For
the Quarter Ended March 31, 2009
|
||||||
Provident
|
||||||
Provident
|
Bank
|
Consolidated
|
||||
Bank
|
Mortgage
|
Totals
|
||||
Net
interest income, before provision for loan
losses
|
$
10,485
|
$ 186
|
$
10,671
|
|||
Provision
for loan losses
|
12,178
|
1,363
|
13,541
|
|||
Net
interest expense, after provision for loan losses
|
(1,693
|
)
|
(1,177
|
)
|
(2,870
|
)
|
Non-interest
income:
|
||||||
Loan
servicing and other fees (1)
|
50
|
41
|
91
|
|||
Gain
on sale of loans, net
|
6
|
6,101
|
6,107
|
|||
Deposit
account fees
|
684
|
-
|
684
|
|||
Loss
on sale and operations of real estate owned
acquired
in the settlement of loans, net
|
(896
|
)
|
(56
|
)
|
(952
|
)
|
Other
|
454
|
3
|
457
|
|||
Total
non-interest income
|
298
|
6,089
|
6,387
|
|||
Non-interest
expense:
|
||||||
Salaries
and employee benefits
|
3,478
|
1,547
|
5,025
|
|||
Premises
and occupancy
|
564
|
131
|
695
|
|||
Operating
and administrative expenses
|
1,218
|
1,010
|
2,228
|
|||
Total
non-interest expense
|
5,260
|
2,688
|
7,948
|
|||
(Loss)
income before taxes
|
(6,655
|
)
|
2,224
|
(4,431
|
)
|
|
(Benefit)
provision for income taxes
|
(2,796
|
)
|
935
|
(1,861
|
)
|
|
Net
(loss) income
|
$
(3,859
|
)
|
$
1,289
|
$
(2,570
|
)
|
|
Total
assets, end of period
|
$
1,445,310
|
$
117,658
|
$
1,562,968
|
(1)
|
Includes
an inter-company charge of $21 credited to PBM by the Bank during the
period to compensate PBM for originating loans held for
investment.
|
10
The
following tables set forth condensed consolidated statements of operations and
total assets for the Corporation’s operating segments for the nine months ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively (in thousands).
For
the Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010
|
||||||
Provident
|
||||||
Provident
|
Bank
|
Consolidated
|
||||
Bank
|
Mortgage
|
Totals
|
||||
Net
interest income, before provision for loan
losses
|
$
26,986
|
$ 2,290
|
$ 29,276
|
|||
Provision
for loan losses
|
21,261
|
582
|
21,843
|
|||
Net
interest income, after provision for loan losses .
|
5,725
|
1,708
|
7,433
|
|||
Non-interest
income:
|
||||||
Loan
servicing and other fees (1)
|
596
|
41
|
637
|
|||
(Loss)
gain on sale of loans, net
|
(5
|
)
|
9,809
|
9,804
|
||
Deposit
account fees
|
2,135
|
-
|
2,135
|
|||
Gain
on sale of investment securities, net
|
2,290
|
-
|
2,290
|
|||
Gain
on sale and operations of real estate owned
acquired
in the settlement of loans, net
|
208
|
39
|
247
|
|||
Other
|
1,458
|
-
|
1,458
|
|||
Total
non-interest income
|
6,682
|
9,889
|
16,571
|
|||
Non-interest
expense:
|
||||||
Salaries
and employee benefits
|
9,559
|
7,289
|
16,848
|
|||
Premises
and occupancy
|
1,767
|
515
|
2,282
|
|||
Operating
and administrative expenses
|
5,204
|
3,336
|
8,540
|
|||
Total
non-interest expense
|
16,530
|
11,140
|
27,670
|
|||
(Loss)
income before taxes
|
(4,123
|
)
|
457
|
(3,666
|
)
|
|
Benefit
(provision) for income taxes
|
(1,771
|
)
|
192
|
(1,579
|
)
|
|
Net
(loss) income
|
$
(2,352
|
)
|
$ 265
|
$ (2,087
|
)
|
|
Total
assets, end of period
|
$
1,250,341
|
$
154,979
|
$
1,405,320
|
(1)
|
Includes
an inter-company charge of $1 credited to PBM by the Bank during the
period to compensate PBM for originating loans held for
investment.
|
11
For
the Nine Months Ended March 31, 2009
|
||||||
Provident
|
||||||
Provident
|
Bank
|
Consolidated
|
||||
Bank
|
Mortgage
|
Totals
|
||||
Net
interest income, before provision for loan
losses
|
$
31,862
|
$ 343
|
$ 32,205
|
|||
Provision
for loan losses
|
32,387
|
3,422
|
35,809
|
|||
Net
interest expense, after provision for loan losses
|
(525
|
)
|
(3,079
|
)
|
(3,604
|
)
|
Non-interest
income:
|
||||||
Loan
servicing and other fees (1)
|
393
|
212
|
605
|
|||
Gain
on sale of loans, net
|
13
|
8,679
|
8,692
|
|||
Deposit
account fees
|
2,219
|
-
|
2,219
|
|||
Gain
on sale of investment securities
|
356
|
-
|
356
|
|||
Loss
on sale and operations of real estate owned
acquired
in the settlement of loans, net
|
(1,516
|
)
|
(322
|
)
|
(1,838
|
)
|
Other
|
1,147
|
6
|
1,153
|
|||
Total
non-interest income
|
2,612
|
8,575
|
11,187
|
|||
Non-interest
expense:
|
||||||
Salaries
and employee benefits
|
10,144
|
4,031
|
14,175
|
|||
Premises
and occupancy
|
1,749
|
380
|
2,129
|
|||
Operating
and administrative expenses
|
3,528
|
2,719
|
6,247
|
|||
Total
non-interest expense
|
15,421
|
7,130
|
22,551
|
|||
Loss
before taxes
|
(13,334
|
)
|
(1,634
|
)
|
(14,968
|
)
|
Benefit
for income taxes
|
(5,529
|
)
|
(687
|
)
|
(6,216
|
)
|
Net
loss
|
$
(7,805
|
)
|
$ (947
|
)
|
$ (8,752
|
)
|
Total
assets, end of period
|
$
1,445,310
|
$
117,658
|
$
1,562,968
|
(1)
|
Includes
an inter-company charge of $123 credited to PBM by the Bank during the
period to compensate PBM for originating loans held for
investment.
|
Note
5: Derivative and Other Financial Instruments with Off-Balance Sheet
Risks
The
Corporation is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in
the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its
customers. These financial instruments include commitments to extend
credit in the form of originating loans or providing funds under existing lines
of credit, and loan sale commitments to third parties. These
instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest-rate
risk in excess of the amount recognized in the accompanying Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. The Corporation’s
exposure to credit loss, in the event of non-performance by the counterparty to
these financial instruments, is represented by the contractual amount of these
instruments. The Corporation uses the same credit policies in
entering into financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk as it does for
on-balance sheet instruments. As of March
31, 2010 and June 30, 2009, the Corporation had commitments to extend credit (on
loans to be held for investment and loans to be held for sale) of $124.1 million
and $105.7 million, respectively. The following table provides
information regarding undisbursed funds to borrowers on existing loans and lines
of credit with the Bank as well as commitments to originate loans to be held for
investment.
12
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
||
Commitments
|
2010
|
2009
|
|
(In
Thousands)
|
|||
Undisbursed
loan funds – Construction loans
|
$ 19
|
$ 305
|
|
Undisbursed
lines of credit – Mortgage loans
|
1,560
|
2,171
|
|
Undisbursed
lines of credit – Commercial business loans
|
3,417
|
4,148
|
|
Undisbursed
lines of credit – Consumer loans
|
1,785
|
1,617
|
|
Commitments
to extend credit on loans to be held for investment
|
676
|
1,053
|
|
Total
|
$
7,457
|
$
9,294
|
In
accordance with ASC 815, “Derivatives and Hedging,” and interpretations of the
Derivatives Implementation Group of the FASB, the fair value of the commitments
to extend credit on loans to be held for sale, loan sale commitments,
commitments to sell mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), put option contracts and
call option contracts are recorded at fair value on the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Financial Condition, and are included in other assets totaling
$1.2 million at March 31, 2010; and $2.1 million of other assets and $97,000 in
other liabilities at June 30, 2009. The Corporation does not apply
hedge accounting to its derivative financial instruments; therefore, all changes
in fair value are recorded in earnings. The net impact of derivative
financial instruments on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
during the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was a loss of $(1.4) million
and a gain of $2.5 million, respectively, recorded in the gain on sale of
loans. For the nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, the net
impact of derivative financial instruments on the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations was a loss of $(790,000) and a gain of $3.1 million,
respectively, recorded in the gain on sale of loans.
March
31, 2010
|
June
30, 2009
|
|||||||
Fair
|
Fair
|
|||||||
Derivative
Financial Instruments
|
Amount
|
Value
|
Amount
|
Value
|
||||
(In
Thousands)
|
||||||||
Commitments
to extend credit on loans
|
||||||||
to
be held for sale (1)
|
$
123,449
|
$ 367
|
$ 104,630
|
$
1,316
|
||||
Best
efforts loan sale commitments
|
(8,710
|
)
|
-
|
(12,834
|
)
|
-
|
||
Mandatory
loan sale commitments
|
(254,193
|
)
|
816
|
(207,239
|
)
|
656
|
||
Total
|
$
(139,454
|
)
|
$
1,183
|
$
(115,443
|
)
|
$
1,972
|
(1)
|
Net
of 30.3 percent at March 31, 2010 and 34.5 percent at June 30, 2009 of
commitments, which may not fund.
|
Note
6: Income Taxes
FASB ASC
740, “Income Taxes,” requires the affirmative evaluation that it is more likely
than not, based on the technical merits of a tax position, that an enterprise is
entitled to economic benefits resulting from positions taken in income tax
returns. If a tax position does not meet the more-likely-than-not
recognition threshold, the benefit of that position is not recognized in the
financial statements. Management has determined that there are no
unrecognized tax benefits to be reported in the Corporation’s financial
statements, and none are anticipated during the fiscal year ending June 30,
2010.
ASC 740
requires that when determining the need for a valuation allowance against a
deferred tax asset, management must assess both positive and negative evidence
with regard to the realizability of the tax losses represented by that
asset. To the extent available sources of taxable income are
insufficient to absorb tax losses, a valuation allowance is
necessary. Sources of taxable income for this analysis include prior
years’ tax returns, the expected reversals of taxable temporary differences
between book and tax income, prudent and feasible tax-planning strategies, and
future taxable income. The Corporation’s deferred tax asset has
decreased during the first nine months of fiscal 2010 due to charge-offs of
non-performing loans, partly offset by an increase in its allowance for loan
losses. The deferred tax asset related to the allowance will be
realized when actual charge-offs are made against the
allowance. Based on the availability of loss carry-backs and
projected taxable income during the periods
13
for which
loss carry-forwards are available, management believes it is more likely than
not the Corporation will realize the deferred tax asset. The
Corporation continues to monitor the deferred tax asset on a quarterly basis for
a valuation allowance. The future realization of these tax
benefits primarily hinges on adequate future earnings to utilize the tax
benefit. Prospective earnings or losses, tax law changes or capital
changes could prompt the Corporation to reevaluate the assumptions which may be
used to establish a valuation allowance. As of March 31, 2010, the
estimated deferred tax asset was $14.3 million. This compares
to the estimated deferred tax asset of $15.4 million at June 30,
2009. The Corporation did not have any liabilities for uncertain tax
positions or any known unrecognized tax benefit at March 31, 2010 and June 30,
2009.
The
Corporation files income tax returns for the United States and state of
California jurisdictions. The Internal Revenue Service has audited
the Bank’s income tax returns through 1996 and the California Franchise Tax
Board has audited the Bank through 1990. The Internal Revenue Service
also completed a review of the Corporation’s income tax returns for fiscal 2006
and 2007. Tax years subsequent to 2007 remain subject to federal
examination, while the California state tax returns for years subsequent to 2004
are subject to examination by state taxing authorities. It is the
Corporation’s policy to record any penalties or interest arising from federal or
state taxes as a component of income tax expense. There were no
penalties or interest included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the quarter and the nine months ended March 31, 2010 and
2009.
Note
7: Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The
Corporation adopted ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” on July
1, 2008 and elected the fair value option (ASC 825, “Financial Instruments”) on
May 28, 2009 on loans originated for sale by PBM. ASC 820 defines
fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. ASC 825 permits entities
to elect to measure many financial instruments and certain other assets and
liabilities at fair value on an instrument-by-instrument basis (the Fair Value
Option) at specified election dates. At each subsequent reporting
date, an entity is required to report unrealized gains and losses on items in
earnings for which the fair value option has been elected. The
objective of the statement is to provide entities with the opportunity to
mitigate volatility in earnings caused by measuring related assets and
liabilities differently without having to apply complex accounting
provisions.
The
following table describes the difference between the aggregate fair value and
the aggregate unpaid principal balance of loans held for sale at fair
value.
(In
Thousands)
|
Aggregate
Fair
Value
|
Aggregate
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
|
Net
Unrealized
Gain
|
|||
As
of March 31, 2010:
|
||||||
Single-family
loans measured at fair value
|
$
155,800
|
$
152,217
|
$
3,583
|
On April
9, 2009, the FASB issued ASC 820-10-65-4, “Determining Fair Value When the
Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly
Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly.” This
ASC provides additional guidance for estimating fair value in accordance with
ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements,” when the volume and level of activity for
the asset or liability have significantly decreased.
ASC 820
establishes a three-level valuation hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to
valuation techniques used in fair value calculations. The three
levels of inputs are defined as follows:
Level
1
|
-
|
Unadjusted
quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that
the Corporation has the ability to access at the measurement
date.
|
Level
2
|
-
|
Observable
inputs other than Level 1 such as: quoted prices for similar assets or
liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar
assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that
are observable or can be corroborated to observable market data for
substantially the full term of the asset or liability.
|
14
Level
3
|
-
|
Unobservable
inputs for the asset or liability that use significant assumptions,
including assumptions of risks. These unobservable assumptions
reflect the Corporation’s estimate of assumptions that market participants
would use in pricing the asset or liability. Valuation
techniques include use of pricing models, discounted cash flow models and
similar techniques.
|
ASC 820
requires the Corporation to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize
the use of unobservable inputs. If a financial instrument uses inputs
that fall in different levels of the hierarchy, the instrument will be
categorized based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair
value calculation.
The
Corporation’s financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a
recurring basis consist of investment securities, loans held for sale at fair
value, interest-only strips and derivative financial instruments; while
non-performing loans, mortgage servicing assets and real estate owned are
measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis.
Investment
securities are primarily comprised of U.S. government sponsored enterprise debt
securities, U.S. government agency mortgage-backed securities, U.S. government
sponsored enterprise mortgage-backed securities and private issue collateralized
mortgage obligations. The Corporation utilizes unadjusted quoted
prices in active markets for identical securities (Level 1) for its fair value
measurement of debt securities, quoted prices in active and less than active
markets for similar securities (Level 2) for its fair value measurement of
mortgage-backed securities and broker price indications for similar securities
in non-active markets (Level 3) for its fair value measurement of collateralized
mortgage obligations (“CMO”).
Derivative
financial instruments are comprised of commitments to extend credit on loans to
be held for sale and mandatory loan sale commitments. The fair value
is determined, when possible, using quoted secondary-market
prices. If no such quoted price exists, the fair value of a
commitment is determined by quoted prices for a similar commitment or
commitments, adjusted for the specific attributes of each
commitment.
Loans
held for sale at fair value are primarily single-family loans. The
fair value is determined, when possible, using quoted secondary-market prices
such as mandatory loan sale commitments. If no such quoted price
exists, the fair value of a loan is determined by quoted prices for a similar
loan or loans, adjusted for the specific attributes of each loan.
Non-performing
loans are loans which are inadequately protected by the current net worth and
paying capacity of the borrowers or of the collateral pledged. The
non-performing loans are characterized by the distinct possibility that the Bank
will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected. The
fair value of an impaired loan is determined based on an observable market price
or current appraised value of the underlying collateral, less selling
costs. Appraised and reported values may be discounted based on
management’s historical knowledge, changes in market conditions from the time of
valuation, and/or management’s expertise and knowledge of the
borrower. For non-performing loans which are also restructured loans,
the fair value is derived from discounted cash flow analysis, except those which
are in the process of foreclosure, for which the fair value is derived from the
appraised value of its collateral, less selling costs. Non-performing
loans are reviewed and evaluated on at least a quarterly basis for additional
impairment and adjusted accordingly, based on the same factors identified
above. This loss is not recorded directly as an adjustment to current
earnings or other comprehensive income, but rather as a component in determining
the overall adequacy of the allowance for losses on loans. These
adjustments to the estimated fair value of non-performing loans may result in
increases or decreases to the provision for losses on loans recorded in current
earnings.
The
Corporation uses the amortization method for its mortgage servicing assets,
which amortizes servicing assets in proportion to and over the period of
estimated net servicing income and assesses servicing assets for impairment
based on fair value at each reporting date. The fair value of
mortgage servicing assets is calculated using the present value method; which
includes a third party’s prepayment projections of similar instruments, weighted
average coupon rates and the estimated average life.
The
rights to future income from serviced loans that exceed contractually specified
servicing fees are recorded as interest-only strips. The fair value
of interest-only strips is calculated using the same assumptions that are used
to value the related servicing assets.
15
The fair
value of real estate owned is derived from the lower of the appraised value at
the time of foreclosure, less selling costs or the listing price, less selling
costs.
The
Corporation’s valuation methodologies may produce a fair value calculation that
may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair
values. While management believes the Corporation’s valuation
methodologies are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the
use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of
certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value
at the reporting date.
The
following fair value hierarchy table presents information about the
Corporation’s assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
Fair
Value Measurement at March 31, 2010 Using:
|
||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
Level
1
|
Level
2
|
Level
3
|
Total
|
||||
Investment
securities:
|
||||||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
debt securities
|
$
3,335
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ 3,335
|
||||
U.S.
government agency MBS
|
-
|
18,400
|
-
|
18,400
|
||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
MBS
|
-
|
13,123
|
-
|
13,123
|
||||
Private
issue CMO
|
-
|
-
|
1,548
|
1,548
|
||||
Loans
held for sale, at fair value
|
-
|
155,800
|
-
|
155,800
|
||||
Interest-only
strips
|
-
|
-
|
274
|
274
|
||||
Derivative
financial instruments
|
-
|
532
|
651
|
1,183
|
||||
Total
|
$
3,335
|
$
187,855
|
$
2,473
|
$
193,663
|
Fair
Value Measurement at June 30, 2009 Using:
|
||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
Level
1
|
Level
2
|
Level
3
|
Total
|
||||
Investment
securities:
|
||||||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
debt securities
|
$
5,353
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ 5,353
|
||||
U.S.
government agency MBS
|
-
|
74,064
|
-
|
74,064
|
||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
MBS
|
-
|
44,436
|
-
|
44,436
|
||||
Private
issue CMO
|
-
|
-
|
1,426
|
1,426
|
||||
Loans
held for sale, at fair value
|
-
|
135,490
|
-
|
135,490
|
||||
Interest-only
strips
|
-
|
-
|
294
|
294
|
||||
Derivative
financial instruments
|
-
|
(97
|
)
|
2,069
|
1,972
|
|||
Total
|
$
5,353
|
$
253,893
|
$
3,789
|
$
263,035
|
The
following is a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of recurring
fair value measurements recognized in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Financial Condition using Level 3 inputs:
Fair
Value Measurement
Using
Significant Other Unobservable Inputs
(Level
3)
|
|||||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
CMO |
Interest-Only
Strips
|
Derivative
Financial
Instruments
|
Total | |||||||
Beginning
balance at January 1, 2010
|
$
1,580
|
$
275
|
$
1,497
|
$
3,352
|
|||||||
Total
gains or losses (realized/unrealized):
|
|||||||||||
Included
in earnings
|
-
|
(11
|
)
|
(1,497
|
)
|
(1,508
|
)
|
||||
Included
in other comprehensive income
|
1
|
10
|
-
|
11
|
|||||||
Purchases,
issuances, and settlements
|
(33
|
)
|
-
|
651
|
618
|
||||||
Transfers
in and/or out of Level 3
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Ending
balance at March 31, 2010
|
$
1,548
|
$
274
|
$ 651
|
$
2,473
|
16
Fair
Value Measurement
Using
Significant Other Unobservable Inputs
(Level
3)
|
|||||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
CMO
|
Interest-Only
Strips
|
Derivative
Financial Instruments
|
Total | |||||||
Beginning
balance at July 1, 2009
|
$
1,426
|
$
294
|
$
2,069
|
$
3,789
|
|||||||
Total
gains or losses (realized/unrealized):
|
|||||||||||
Included
in earnings
|
-
|
(47
|
)
|
(4,473
|
)
|
(4,520
|
)
|
||||
Included
in other comprehensive income
|
292
|
27
|
-
|
319
|
|||||||
Purchases,
issuances, and settlements
|
(170
|
)
|
-
|
3,055
|
2,885
|
||||||
Transfers
in and/or out of Level 3
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Ending
balance at March 31, 2010
|
$
1,548
|
$
274
|
$ 651
|
$
2,473
|
The
following fair value hierarchy table presents information about the
Corporation’s assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring
basis:
Fair
Value Measurement at March 31, 2010 Using:
|
||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
Level
1
|
Level
2
|
Level
3
|
Total
|
||||
Non-performing
loans (1)
|
$
-
|
$
45,218
|
$
26,538
|
$
71,756
|
||||
Mortgage
servicing assets
|
-
|
-
|
404
|
404
|
||||
Real
estate owned (1)
|
-
|
19,091
|
-
|
19,091
|
||||
Total
|
$
-
|
$
64,309
|
$
26,942
|
$
91,251
|
(1)
Amounts exclude estimated selling costs.
Note
8: Incentive Plans
As of
March 31, 2010, the Corporation had three share-based compensation plans, which
are described below. These plans are the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan,
2003 Stock Option Plan and 1996 Stock Option Plan. The compensation
cost that has been charged against income for these plans was $421,000 and
$297,000 for the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and there
was no tax benefit from these plans during either quarter. For the
nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, the compensation cost for these plans
was $859,000 and $855,000, respectively, and there was no tax benefit from these
plans during either period.
Equity Incentive
Plan. The Corporation established and the shareholders
approved the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (“2006 Plan”) for directors, advisory
directors, directors emeriti, officers and employees of the Corporation and its
subsidiary. The 2006 Plan authorizes 365,000 stock options and
185,000 shares of restricted stock. The 2006 Plan also provides that
no person may be granted more than 73,000 shares of stock options or 27,750
shares of restricted stock in any one year.
Equity Incentive Plan - Stock
Options. Under the 2006 Plan, options may not be granted at a
price less than the fair market value at the date of the
grant. Options typically vest over a five-year or shorter period as
long as the director, advisory director, director emeriti, officer or employee
remains in service to the Corporation. The options are exercisable
after vesting for up to the remaining term of the original grant. The
maximum term of the options granted is 10 years.
The fair
value of each option grant is estimated on the date of the grant using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model with the assumptions noted in the following
table. The expected volatility is based on implied volatility from
historical common stock closing prices for the prior 84 months. The
expected dividend yield is based on the most recent quarterly dividend on an
annualized basis. The expected term is based on the historical
experience of all fully vested stock option grants and is reviewed
annually. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury
note rate with a term similar to the underlying stock option on the particular
grant date.
17
Quarter
|
Quarter
|
Nine
Months
|
Nine
Months
|
|||||
Ended
|
Ended
|
Ended
|
Ended
|
|||||
March
31,
|
March
31,
|
March
31,
|
March
31,
|
|||||
2010
|
2009
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||
Expected
volatility
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
35%
|
||||
Weighted-average
volatility
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
35%
|
||||
Expected
dividend yield
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2.8%
|
||||
Expected
term (in years)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
7.0
|
||||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
3.5%
|
In the
third quarter of fiscal 2010, there were no stock options granted, exercised or
forfeited. This compares to a total of 2,200 stock options forfeited,
and no stock options granted nor exercised in the third quarter of fiscal
2009. For the first nine months of fiscal 2010, there were no stock
options granted nor exercised but there were 300 stock options
forfeited. This compares to a total of 182,000 stock options with a
three-year cliff vesting schedule and fair value of $2.14 per stock option,
2,200 stock options forfeited and no stock options granted in the first nine
months of fiscal 2009. As of March 31, 2010 and 2009, there were
10,200 stock options and 9,900 stock options available for future grants under
the 2006 Plan, respectively.
The
following table summarizes the stock option activity in the 2006 Plan for the
quarter and nine months ended March 31, 2010.
Options
|
Shares
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(Years)
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
($000)
|
||||
Outstanding
at January 1, 2010
|
354,800
|
$
17.45
|
||||||
Granted
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Exercised
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Forfeited
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Outstanding
at March 31, 2010
|
354,800
|
$
17.45
|
7.62
|
$
-
|
||||
Vested
and expected to vest at March 31, 2010
|
292,170
|
$
18.42
|
7.56
|
$
-
|
||||
Exercisable
at March 31, 2010
|
104,280
|
$
28.31
|
6.86
|
$
-
|
Options
|
Shares
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(Years)
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
($000)
|
||||
Outstanding
at July 1, 2009
|
355,100
|
$
17.46
|
||||||
Granted
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Exercised
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Forfeited
|
(300
|
)
|
$
28.31
|
|||||
Outstanding
at March 31, 2010
|
354,800
|
$
17.45
|
7.62
|
$
-
|
||||
Vested
and expected to vest at March 31, 2010
|
292,170
|
$
18.42
|
7.56
|
$
-
|
||||
Exercisable
at March 31, 2010
|
104,280
|
$
28.31
|
6.86
|
$
-
|
As of
March 31, 2010 and 2009, there was $642,000 and $799,000 of unrecognized
compensation expense, respectively, related to unvested share-based compensation
arrangements granted under the stock options in the 2006 Plan. The
expense is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.7 years
and 2.7 years, respectively. The forfeiture rate during the first
nine months of fiscal 2010 was 25 percent and was calculated by using the
historical forfeiture experience of all fully vested stock option grants and is
reviewed annually.
Equity Incentive Plan – Restricted
Stock. The Corporation used 185,000 shares of its treasury
stock to fund the 2006 Plan. Awarded shares typically vest over a
five-year or shorter period as long as the director, advisory director, director
emeriti, officer or employee remains in service to the
Corporation. Once vested, a recipient of
18
restricted
stock will have all rights of a shareholder, including the power to vote and the
right to receive dividends. The Corporation recognizes compensation
expense for the restricted stock awards based on the fair value of the shares at
the award date.
In the
third quarter of fiscal 2010, a total of 11,200 shares of restricted stock were
vested and distributed, while no restricted stock was awarded or
forfeited. This compares to a total of 11,200 shares of restricted
stock vested and distributed, 1,400 shares forfeited and no shares awarded in
the comparable period in fiscal 2009. For the first nine months of
fiscal 2010, a total of 12,000 shares of restricted stock were vested and
distributed, while no shares were awarded or forfeited. This compares
to a total of 100,300 shares of restricted stock awarded with a three-year cliff
vesting schedule, 12,000 shares vested and distributed, and 1,400 shares
forfeited during the first nine months of fiscal 2009. As of March
31, 2010 and 2009, there were 25,350 shares and 25,350 shares of restricted
stock available for future awards, respectively.
The
following table summarizes the unvested restricted stock activity in the quarter
and nine months ended March 31, 2010.
Unvested
Shares
|
Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Award
Date
Fair
Value
|
||
Unvested
at January 1, 2010
|
135,500
|
$
11.63
|
||
Granted
|
-
|
$ -
|
||
Vested
|
(11,200
|
)
|
$
26.49
|
|
Forfeited
|
-
|
$ -
|
||
Unvested
at March 31, 2010
|
124,300
|
$
10.29
|
||
Expected
to vest at March 31, 2010
|
93,225
|
$
10.29
|
Unvested
Shares
|
Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Award
Date
Fair
Value
|
||
Unvested
at July 1, 2009
|
136,300
|
$
11.67
|
||
Granted
|
-
|
$ -
|
||
Vested
|
(12,000
|
)
|
$
25.93
|
|
Forfeited
|
-
|
$ -
|
||
Unvested
at March 31, 2010
|
124,300
|
$
10.29
|
||
Expected
to vest at March 31, 2010
|
93,225
|
$
10.29
|
As of
March 31, 2010 and 2009, the unrecognized compensation expense was $955,000 and
$1.7 million, respectively, related to unvested share-based compensation
arrangements awarded under the restricted stock in the 2006 Plan, and reported
as a reduction to stockholders’ equity. This expense is expected to
be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.7 years and 2.7 years,
respectively. Similar to stock options, a forfeiture rate of 25
percent has been applied for the restricted stock compensation expense
calculations in the first nine months of fiscal 2010. The fair value
of shares vested and distributed during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 and
2009 was $34,000 and $46,000, respectively. For the first nine months
of fiscal 2010 and 2009, the fair value of shares vested and distributed was
$38,000 and $52,000, respectively.
Stock Option
Plans. The Corporation established the 1996 Stock Option Plan
and the 2003 Stock Option Plan (collectively, the “Stock Option Plans”) for key
employees and eligible directors under which options to acquire up to 1.15
million shares and 352,500 shares of common stock, respectively, may be
granted. Under the Stock Option Plans, stock options may not be
granted at a price less than the fair market value at the date of the
grant. Stock options vest over a five-year period on a pro-rata basis
as long as the employee or director remains in service to the
Corporation. The stock options are exercisable after vesting for up
to the remaining term of the original grant. The maximum term of the
stock options granted is 10 years.
The fair
value of each stock option grant is estimated on the date of the grant using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model with the assumptions noted in the following
table. The expected volatility is based on implied volatility from
historical common stock closing prices for the prior 84 months. The
expected dividend yield is based on the most recent quarterly dividend on an
annualized basis. The expected term is based on the historical
19
experience
of all fully vested stock option grants and is reviewed annually. The
risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury note rate with a term
similar to the underlying stock option on the particular grant
date.
There was
no activity in the third quarter and first nine months of fiscal 2010 and
2009. As of March 31, 2010 and 2009, the number of stock options
available for future grants under the Stock Option Plans were 14,900 and 14,900
stock options, respectively.
The
following is a summary of the activity in the Stock Option Plans for the quarter
and nine months ended March 31, 2010.
Options
|
Shares
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(Years)
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
($000)
|
||||
Outstanding
at January 1, 2010
|
550,400
|
$
20.52
|
||||||
Granted
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Exercised
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Forfeited
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Outstanding
at March 31, 2010
|
550,400
|
$
20.52
|
3.86
|
$
-
|
||||
Vested
and expected to vest at March 31, 2010
|
535,925
|
$
20.40
|
3.78
|
$
-
|
||||
Exercisable
at March 31, 2010
|
492,500
|
$
20.02
|
3.51
|
$
-
|
Options
|
Shares
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(Years)
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
($000)
|
||||
Outstanding
at July 1, 2009
|
550,400
|
$
20.52
|
||||||
Granted
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Exercised
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Forfeited
|
-
|
$ -
|
||||||
Outstanding
at March 31, 2010
|
550,400
|
$
20.52
|
3.86
|
$
-
|
||||
Vested
and expected to vest at March 31, 2010
|
535,925
|
$
20.40
|
3.78
|
$
-
|
||||
Exercisable
at March 31, 2010
|
492,500
|
$
20.02
|
3.51
|
$
-
|
As of
March 31, 2010 and 2009, there was $264,000 and $1.1 million of unrecognized
compensation expense, respectively, related to unvested share-based compensation
arrangements granted under the Stock Option Plans. The expense is
expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.7 years at both
period ends. The forfeiture rate during the first nine months of
fiscal 2010 was 25% and was calculated by using the historical forfeiture
experience of all fully vested stock option grants and is reviewed
annually.
Note
9: Subsequent Events
Management
has evaluated events through the date that the financial statements were
issued. No material subsequent events have occurred since March 31,
2010 that would require recognition or disclosure in these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
20
ITEM
2 – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
General
Provident
Financial Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation, was organized in January 1996
for the purpose of becoming the holding company of Provident Savings Bank,
F.S.B. upon the Bank’s conversion from a federal mutual to a federal stock
savings bank (“Conversion”). The Conversion was completed on June 27,
1996. At March 31, 2010, the Corporation had total assets of $1.41
billion, total deposits of $947.9 million and total stockholders’ equity of
$124.4 million. The Corporation has not engaged in any significant
activity other than holding the stock of the Bank. Accordingly, the
information set forth in this report, including financial statements and related
data, relates primarily to the Bank and its subsidiaries.
The Bank,
founded in 1956, is a federally chartered stock savings bank headquartered in
Riverside, California. The Bank is regulated by the Office of Thrift
Supervision (“OTS”), its primary federal regulator, and the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), the insurer of its deposits. The
Bank’s deposits are federally insured up to applicable limits by the
FDIC. The Bank has been a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank System
since 1956.
The
Bank’s business consists of community banking activities and mortgage banking
activities, conducted by Provident Bank and Provident Bank Mortgage, a division
of the Bank. Community banking activities primarily consist of
accepting deposits from customers within the communities surrounding the Bank’s
full service offices and investing those funds in single-family loans,
multi-family loans, commercial real estate loans, construction loans, commercial
business loans, consumer loans and other real estate loans. The Bank
also offers business checking accounts, other business banking services, and
services loans for others. Mortgage banking activities consist of the
origination and sale of mortgage and consumer loans secured primarily by
single-family residences. The Bank currently operates 14
retail/business banking offices in Riverside County and San Bernardino County
(commonly known as the Inland Empire). Provident Bank Mortgage
operates wholesale loan production offices in Pleasanton and Rancho Cucamonga,
California and retail loan production offices in City of Industry, Escondido,
Glendora and Riverside (2), California. The Bank’s revenues are
derived principally from interest on its loans and investment securities and
fees generated through its community banking and mortgage banking
activities. There are various risks inherent in the Bank’s business
including, among others, the general business environment, interest rates, the
California real estate market, the demand for loans, the prepayment of loans,
the repurchase of loans previously sold to investors, the secondary market
conditions to sell loans, competitive conditions, legislative and regulatory
changes, fraud and other risks.
The
Corporation began to distribute quarterly cash dividends in the quarter ended
September 30, 2002. On January 28, 2010, the Corporation declared a
quarterly cash dividend of $0.01 per share for the Corporation’s shareholders of
record at the close of business on February 25, 2010, which was paid on March
23, 2010. Future declarations or payments of dividends will be
subject to the consideration of the Corporation’s Board of Directors, which will
take into account the Corporation’s financial condition, results of operations,
tax considerations, capital requirements, industry standards, legal
restrictions, economic conditions and other factors, including the regulatory
restrictions which affect the payment of dividends by the Bank to the
Corporation. Under Delaware law, dividends may be paid either out of
surplus or, if there is no surplus, out of net profits for the current fiscal
year and/or the preceding fiscal year in which the dividend is
declared.
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is
intended to assist in understanding the financial condition and results of
operations of the Corporation. The information contained in this
section should be read in conjunction with the Unaudited Interim Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying selected Notes to Unaudited
Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Safe-Harbor
Statement
This Form
10-Q contains statements that the Corporation believes are “forward-looking
statements.” These statements relate to the Corporation’s financial
condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance or
business. You should not place undue reliance on these statements, as they are
subject to risks and uncertainties. When considering these forward-looking
statements, you should keep in mind these risks and uncertainties, as well as
any cautionary statements the Corporation may make. Moreover, you
should treat these statements as speaking only as of the date they are made and
based only on information then actually known to the Corporation. The
21
Corporation
does not undertake and specifically disclaims any obligation to revise any
forward-looking statements to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or
unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements. These
risks could cause our actual results for fiscal 2010 and beyond to differ
materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements by, or on
behalf of, us, and could negatively affect the Corporation’s operating and stock
price performance. Factors which could cause actual results to differ
materially include, but are not limited to the credit risks of lending
activities, including changes in the level and trend of loan delinquencies and
charge-offs and changes in our allowance for loan losses and provision for loan
losses that may be impacted by deterioration in the housing and commercial real
estate markets; changes in general economic conditions, either nationally or in
our market areas; changes in the levels of general interest rates, and the
relative differences between short and long term interest rates, deposit
interest rates, our net interest margin and funding sources; fluctuations in the
demand for loans, the number of unsold homes, land and other properties and
fluctuations in real estate values in our market areas; secondary market
conditions for loans and our ability to sell loans in the secondary market;
results of examinations of us by the OTS or other regulatory authorities,
including the possibility that any such regulatory authority may, among other
things, require us to enter into a formal or informal enforcement action or to
increase our allowance for loan losses, write-down assets, change our regulatory
capital position or affect our ability to borrow funds or maintain or increase
deposits, which could adversely affect our liquidity and earnings; legislative
or regulatory changes that adversely affect our business including changes in
regulatory policies and principles, or the interpretation of regulatory capital
or other rules; our ability to attract and retain deposits; further increases in
premiums for deposit insurance; our ability to control operating costs and
expenses; the use of estimates in determining fair value of certain of our
assets, which estimates may prove to be incorrect and result in significant
declines in valuation; difficulties in reducing risk associated with the loans
on our balance sheet; staffing fluctuations in response to product demand or the
implementation of corporate strategies that affect our workforce and potential
associated charges; computer systems on which we depend could fail or experience
a security breach; our ability to retain key members of our senior
management team; costs and effects of litigation, including settlements and
judgments; our ability to implement our branch expansion strategy; our ability
to successfully integrate any assets, liabilities, customers, systems, and
management personnel we have acquired or may in the future acquire into our
operations and our ability to realize related revenue synergies and cost savings
within expected time frames and any goodwill charges related thereto; increased
competitive pressures among financial services companies; changes in consumer
spending, borrowing and savings habits; the availability of resources to address
changes in laws, rules, or regulations or to respond to regulatory actions; our
ability to pay dividends on our common stock; adverse changes in the securities
markets; inability of key third-party providers to perform their
obligations to us; changes in accounting policies and practices, as may be
adopted by the financial institution regulatory agencies or the FASB, including
additional guidance and interpretation on accounting issues and details of the
implementation of new accounting methods; and other economic, competitive,
governmental, regulatory, and technological factors affecting our operations,
pricing, products and services and the other risks described as detailed in the
Corporation’s reports filed with the SEC, including its Annual Report on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 and subsequently filed Quarterly
Reports on Form 10-Q.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The
discussion and analysis of the Corporation’s financial condition and results of
operations is based upon the Corporation’s condensed consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation
of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and
judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues
and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at
the date of the financial statements. Actual results may differ from
these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
The
allowance for loan losses involves significant judgment and assumptions by
management, which has a material impact on the carrying value of net
loans. Management considers the accounting estimate related to the
allowance for loan losses a critical accounting estimate because it is highly
susceptible to change from period to period, requiring management to make
assumptions about probable incurred losses inherent in the loan portfolio at the
balance sheet date. The impact of a sudden large loss could deplete the
allowance and require increased provisions to replenish the allowance, which
would negatively affect earnings.
The
allowance is based on two principles of accounting: (i) ASC 450,
“Contingencies,” which requires that losses be accrued when they are probable of
occurring and can be estimated; and (ii) ASC 310, “Receivables,” which require
that losses be accrued based on the differences between the value of collateral,
present value of future cash flows or values that are observable in the
secondary market and the loan balance. The allowance has two
22
components:
a formula allowance for groups of homogeneous loans and a specific valuation
allowance for identified problem loans. Each of these components is
based upon estimates that can change over time. The formula allowance
is based primarily on historical experience and as a result can differ from
actual losses incurred in the future. The history is reviewed at
least quarterly and adjustments are made as needed. Various
techniques are used to arrive at specific loss estimates, including historical
loss information, discounted cash flows and the fair market value of
collateral. The use of these techniques is inherently subjective and
the actual losses could be greater or less than the estimates.
Interest
is not accrued on any loan when its contractual payments are more than 90 days
delinquent or if the loan is deemed impaired. In addition, interest
is not recognized on any loan where management has determined that collection is
not reasonably assured. A non-accrual loan may be restored to accrual
status when delinquent principal and interest payments are brought current and
future monthly principal and interest payments are expected to be
collected.
ASC 815
requires that derivatives of the Corporation be recorded in the consolidated
financial statements at fair value. Management considers its policy
for accounting for derivatives to be a critical accounting policy because these
instruments have certain interest rate risk characteristics that change in value
based upon changes in the capital markets. The Bank’s derivatives are
primarily the result of its mortgage banking activities in the form of
commitments to extend credit, commitments to sell loans, commitments to sell MBS
and option contracts to mitigate the risk of the commitments to extend
credit. Estimates of the percentage of commitments to extend credit
on loans to be held for sale that may not fund are based upon historical data
and current market trends. The fair value adjustments of the
derivatives are recorded in the consolidated statements of operations with
offsets to other assets or other liabilities in the consolidated statements of
financial condition.
Management
accounts for income taxes by estimating future tax effects of temporary
differences between the tax and book basis of assets and liabilities considering
the provisions of enacted tax laws. These differences result in
deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included in the Corporation’s
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. The
application of income tax law is inherently complex. Laws and
regulations in this area are voluminous and are often ambiguous. As
such, management is required to make many subjective assumptions and judgments
regarding the Corporation’s income tax exposures, including judgments in
determining the amount and timing of recognition of the resulting deferred tax
assets and liabilities, including projections of future taxable
income. Interpretations of and guidance surrounding income tax laws
and regulations change over time. As such, changes in management’
subjective assumptions and judgments can materially affect amounts recognized in
the consolidated balance sheets and statements of
operations. Therefore, management considers its accounting for income
taxes a critical accounting policy.
Executive
Summary and Operating Strategy
Provident
Savings Bank, F.S.B., established in 1956, is a financial services company
committed to serving consumers and small to mid-sized businesses in the Inland
Empire region of Southern California. The Bank conducts its business
operations as Provident Bank, Provident Bank Mortgage, a division of the Bank,
and through its subsidiary, Provident Financial Corp. The business
activities of the Corporation, primarily through the Bank and its subsidiary,
consist of community banking, mortgage banking and, to a lesser degree,
investment services for customers and trustee services on behalf of the
Bank.
Community
banking operations primarily consist of accepting deposits from customers within
the communities surrounding the Bank’s full service offices and investing those
funds in single-family, multi-family, commercial real estate, construction,
commercial business, consumer and other loans. The primary source of
income in community banking is net interest income, which is the difference
between the interest income earned on loans and investment securities, and the
interest expense paid on interest-bearing deposits and borrowed
funds. Additionally, certain fees are collected from depositors, such
as returned check fees, deposit account service charges, ATM fees, IRA/KEOGH
fees, safe deposit box fees, travelers check fees, and wire transfer fees, among
others. During the next three years, although not immediately given
the uncertain environment, the Corporation intends to improve the community
banking business by moderately growing total assets; by decreasing the
concentration of single-family mortgage loans within loans held for investment;
and by increasing the concentration of higher yielding multi-family, commercial
real estate, construction and commercial business loans (which are sometimes
referred to in this report as “preferred loans”). In addition, over
time, the Corporation intends to decrease the percentage of time deposits in its
deposit base and to increase the percentage of lower cost checking and savings
accounts. This strategy is
23
intended
to improve core revenue through a higher net interest margin and ultimately,
coupled with the growth of the Corporation, an increase in net interest
income. While the Corporation’s long-term strategy is for moderate
growth, management has determined that deleveraging the balance sheet is the
most prudent short-term strategy in response to current weaknesses in general
economic conditions. Deleveraging the balance sheet improves capital
ratios and mitigates credit and liquidity risk.
Mortgage
banking operations primarily consist of the origination and sale of mortgage
loans secured by single-family residences. The primary sources of
income in mortgage banking are gain on sale of loans and certain fees collected
from borrowers in connection with the loan origination process. The
Corporation will continue to modify its operations in response to the rapidly
changing mortgage banking environment. Most recently, the Corporation
has been increasing the number of mortgage banking personnel to capitalize on
the increasing loan demand, the result of significantly lower mortgage interest
rates. Changes may also include a different product mix, further
tightening of underwriting standards, variations in its operating expenses or a
combination of these and other changes.
Provident
Financial Corp performs trustee services for the Bank’s real estate secured loan
transactions and has in the past held, and may in the future, hold real estate
for investment. Investment services operations primarily consist of
selling alternative investment products such as annuities and mutual funds to
the Bank’s depositors. Investment services and trustee services
contribute a very small percentage of gross revenue.
There are
a number of risks associated with the business activities of the Corporation,
many of which are beyond the Corporation’s control, including: changes in
accounting principles, regulation and interest rates and the economy, among
others. The Corporation attempts to mitigate many of these risks
through prudent banking practices such as interest rate risk management, credit
risk management, operational risk management, and liquidity risk
management. The current economic environment presents heightened risk
for the Corporation primarily with respect to falling real estate values and
higher loan delinquencies. Declining real estate values may lead to
higher loan losses since the majority of the Corporation’s loans are secured by
real estate located within California. Significant declines in the
value of California real estate may inhibit the Corporation’s ability to recover
on defaulted loans by selling the underlying real estate. For further
details on risk factors, see the “Safe-Harbor Statement” on page 21 and “Item 1A
– Risk Factors” on page 50.
Off-Balance
Sheet Financing Arrangements and Contractual Obligations
The
following table summarizes the Corporation’s contractual obligations at March
31, 2010 and the effect these obligations are expected to have on the
Corporation’s liquidity and cash flows in future periods (in
thousands):
Payments
Due by Period
|
|||||||||
1
year
|
Over
1 year
|
Over
3 years
|
Over
|
||||||
or
less
|
to
3 years
|
to
5 years
|
5
years
|
Total
|
|||||
Operating
obligations
|
$ 895
|
$ 1,186
|
$ 268
|
$ -
|
$ 2,349
|
||||
Pension
benefits
|
-
|
248
|
396
|
6,174
|
6,818
|
||||
Time
deposits
|
364,478
|
77,266
|
68,391
|
3,411
|
513,546
|
||||
FHLB
– San Francisco advances
|
119,529
|
144,237
|
66,339
|
2,291
|
332,396
|
||||
FHLB
– San Francisco letter of credit
|
11,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
11,000
|
||||
FHLB
– San Francisco MPF credit
enhancement
|
3,147
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
3,147
|
||||
Total
|
$
499,049
|
$
222,937
|
$
135,394
|
$
11,876
|
$
869,256
|
The
expected obligation for time deposits and FHLB – San Francisco advances include
anticipated interest accruals based on the respective contractual
terms.
In
addition to the off-balance sheet financing arrangements and contractual
obligations mentioned above, the Corporation has derivatives and other financial
instruments with off-balance sheet risks as described in Note 5 of the Notes to
Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements on page
12.
24
Comparison
of Financial Condition at March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2009
Total
assets decreased $174.3 million, or 11 percent, to $1.41 billion at March 31,
2010 from $1.58 billion at June 30, 2009. The decrease was primarily
attributable to decreases in investment securities and loans held for
investment, partly offset by an increase in cash and cash equivalents and an
increase in loans held for sale at fair value. The decline in total
assets and the increase in cash and cash equivalents are consistent with the
Corporation strategy of deleveraging the balance sheet to improve capital ratios
and to mitigate credit and liquidity risk.
Total
cash and cash equivalents, primarily excess cash at the Federal Reserve Bank of
San Francisco, increased $29.1 million, or 51 percent, to $86.0 million at March
31, 2010 from $56.9 million at June 30, 2009.
Total
investment securities decreased $88.9 million, or 71 percent, to $36.4 million
at March 31, 2010 from $125.3 million at June 30, 2009. The decrease
was primarily the result of the sale of $65.3 million of investment securities
for a net gain of $2.3 million as well as the scheduled and accelerated
principal payments on mortgage-backed securities of $19.1
million. The Bank determined that the sale of investment securities
would help satisfy its short-term deleveraging strategy. The Bank
evaluates individual investment securities quarterly for other-than-temporary
declines in market value. The Bank does not believe that there are
any other-than-temporary impairments at March 31, 2010; therefore, no impairment
losses have been recorded for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.
The
amortized cost and estimated fair value of investment securities as of March 31,
2010 and June 30, 2009 were as follows:
March
31, 2010
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
|
Gross
Unrealized
(Losses)
|
Estimated
Fair
Value
|
Carrying
Value
|
|||||
(In
Thousands)
|
||||||||||
Available
for sale
|
||||||||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
debt securities
|
$ 3,250
|
$ 85
|
$ -
|
$ 3,335
|
$ 3,335
|
|||||
U.S.
government agency MBS (1)
|
17,971
|
429
|
-
|
18,400
|
18,400
|
|||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
MBS
|
12,734
|
389
|
-
|
13,123
|
13,123
|
|||||
Private
issue CMO (2)
|
1,646
|
-
|
(98
|
)
|
1,548
|
1,548
|
||||
Total
investment securities
|
$
35,601
|
$
903
|
$
(98
|
)
|
$
36,406
|
$
36,406
|
(1)
|
Mortgage-backed
securities (“MBS”).
|
(2)
|
Collateralized
Mortgage Obligations (“CMO”).
|
June
30, 2009
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
|
Gross
Unrealized
(Losses)
|
Estimated
Fair
Value
|
Carrying
Value
|
|||||
(In
Thousands)
|
||||||||||
Available
for sale
|
||||||||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
debt securities
|
$ 5,250
|
$ 103
|
$ -
|
$ 5,353
|
$ 5,353
|
|||||
U.S.
government agency MBS
|
72,209
|
1,855
|
-
|
74,064
|
74,064
|
|||||
U.S.
government sponsored
enterprise
MBS
|
43,016
|
1,420
|
-
|
44,436
|
44,436
|
|||||
Private
issue CMO
|
1,817
|
-
|
(391
|
)
|
1,426
|
1,426
|
||||
Total
investment securities
|
$
122,292
|
$
3,378
|
$
(391
|
)
|
$
125,279
|
$
125,279
|
25
|
Contractual
maturities of investment securities as of March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2009
were as follows:
|
(In
Thousands)
|
March
31, 2010
|
June
30, 2009
|
|||||
Estimated
|
Estimated
|
||||||
Amortized
|
Fair
|
Amortized
|
Fair
|
||||
Cost
|
Value
|
Cost
|
Value
|
||||
Available
for sale
|
|||||||
Due
in one year or less
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
|||
Due
after one through five years
|
3,250
|
|
3,335
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
Due
after five through ten years
|
-
|
-
|
5,250
|
5,353
|
|||
Due
after ten years
|
32,351
|
33,071
|
117,042
|
119,926
|
|||
Total investment securities
|
$
35,601
|
$
36,406
|
$
122,292
|
$
125,279
|
Loans
held for investment decreased $132.5 million, or 11 percent, to $1.03 billion at
March 31, 2010 from $1.17 billion at June 30, 2009. Total loan
principal payments during the first nine months of fiscal 2010 were $99.0
million, compared to $126.0 million during the comparable period in fiscal
2009. In addition, real estate owned acquired in the settlement of
loans in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 was $45.1 million, an increase
from $41.6 million in the same period last year. During the first
nine months of fiscal 2010, the Bank originated $2.3 million of loans held for
investment, primarily commercial real estate loans, compared to $20.1 million
for the same period last year. The Bank did not purchase any loans to
be held for investment in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 as compared to
$595,000 in the same period in fiscal 2009, given the economic uncertainty of
the current banking environment. The balance of preferred loans
decreased to $470.4 million, or 43 percent of loans held for investment at March
31, 2010, as compared to $508.7 million, or 42 percent of loans held for
investment at June 30, 2009. Purchased loans serviced by others at
March 31, 2010 were $23.7 million, or two percent of loans held for investment,
compared to $125.4 million, or 11 percent of loans held for investment at June
30, 2009. The decrease in the purchased loans serviced by others was
primarily attributable to the Bank’s decision in September 2009 to acquire
approximately $95.3 million of loan servicing from one of its loan servicers who
no longer met their contractual loan servicing covenants, resulting in a 25
basis point increase to the loan yield of these loans.
The table
below describes the geographic dispersion of real estate secured loans held for
investment at March 31, 2010, as a percentage of the total dollar amount
outstanding (dollars in thousands):
Inland
Empire
|
Southern
California
(1)
|
Other
California
(2)
|
Other
States
|
Total
|
||||||
Loan
Category
|
Balance
|
%
|
Balance
|
%
|
Balance
|
%
|
Balance
|
%
|
Balance
|
%
|
Single-family
|
$184,780
|
30%
|
$332,312
|
55%
|
$ 83,636
|
14%
|
$6,761
|
1%
|
$607,489
|
100%
|
Multi-family
|
32,405
|
10%
|
250,992
|
72%
|
60,004
|
17%
|
3,643
|
1%
|
347,044
|
100%
|
Commercial
real estate
|
57,145
|
50%
|
52,214
|
46%
|
2,325
|
2%
|
1,629
|
2%
|
113,313
|
100%
|
Construction
|
1,944
|
83%
|
400
|
17%
|
-
|
0%
|
-
|
0%
|
2,344
|
100%
|
Other
|
1,532
|
100%
|
-
|
0%
|
-
|
0%
|
-
|
0%
|
1,532
|
100%
|
Total
|
$277,806
|
26%
|
$635,918
|
59%
|
$145,965
|
14%
|
$12,033
|
1%
|
$1,071,722
|
100%
|
(1)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire.
|
(2)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire and Southern
California.
|
Total
deposits decreased $41.3 million, or four percent, to $947.9 million at March
31, 2010 from $989.2 million at June 30, 2009. Time deposits declined
$138.5 million to $498.4 million at March 31, 2010 from $636.9 million at June
30, 2009, while transaction accounts increased $97.1 million to $449.5 million
at March 31, 2010 from $352.4 million at June 30, 2009. The decrease
in time deposits was primarily attributable to the strategic decision to compete
less aggressively on time deposit interest rates and the Bank’s marketing
strategy to promote transaction accounts. Additionally, in the
quarter ended September 30, 2009, the Bank prepaid and did not offer time
deposit renewal rates to a single depositor with balances of $83.0 million and
the accounts were closed.
Borrowings,
consisting of FHLB – San Francisco advances, decreased $147.0 million, or 32
percent, to $309.7 million at March 31, 2010 from $456.7 million at June 30,
2009. The decrease was due to scheduled maturities and $102.0 million
of prepayments consistent with the Corporation’s short-term strategy to
deleverage the balance sheet. The weighted-average maturity of the
Bank’s FHLB – San Francisco advances was approximately 23 months (21 months, if
put options are exercised by the FHLB – San Francisco) at March 31, 2010, as
compared to the weighted-
26
average
maturity of 28 months (26 months, if
put options were exercised by the FHLB – San Francisco) at June 30,
2009.
Total
stockholders’ equity increased $9.5 million, or eight percent, to $124.4 million
at March 31, 2010, from $114.9 million at June 30, 2009, primarily as a result
of additional capital, partly offset by the net loss and the quarterly cash
dividends paid, during the first nine months of fiscal 2010. Retained
earnings declined $2.3 million, or two percent, to $132.3 million at March 31,
2010 from $134.6 million at June 30, 2009, primarily attributable to the net
loss during the period. The accumulated other comprehensive income,
net of tax, declined $1.2 million, or 67 percent, to $624,000 at March 31, 2010
from $1.9 million at June 30, 2009, primarily attributable to the sale of
investment securities for a gain of $2.3 million, or $1.3 million, net of
statutory taxes.
The
Corporation raised $12.0 million of capital in December 2009 through a follow-on
public offering, issuing 5.18 million shares of common stock at $2.50 per
share. During the first nine months of fiscal 2010, no stock options
were exercised and no common stock was repurchased. The total cash
dividend paid to the Corporation’s shareholders in the first nine months of
fiscal 2010 was $238,000.
Comparison
of Operating Results for the Quarters and Nine Months Ended March 31, 2010 and
2009
The
Corporation’s net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 was $371,000,
compared to a net loss of $(2.6) million during the same quarter of fiscal
2009. The improvement in net earnings was primarily a result of a
decrease in the provision for loan losses, partly offset by a decrease in net
interest income (before provision for loan losses), a decrease in non-interest
income and an increase in operating expenses. For the nine months
ended March 31, 2010, the Corporation’s net loss was $(2.1) million, compared to
a net loss of $(8.8) million during the same period of fiscal
2009. The improvement in net loss was primarily a result of a
decrease in the provision for loan losses and an increase in non-interest
income, partly offset by a decrease in net interest income (before provision for
loan losses) and an increase in operating expenses.
The
Corporation’s efficiency ratio, defined as non-interest expense divided by the
sum of net interest income (before provision for loan losses) and non-interest
income, increased to 77 percent in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 from 47
percent in the same period of fiscal 2009. The increase in the
efficiency ratio was a result of a decrease in net interest income (before
provision for loan losses), a decrease in non-interest income and an increase in
non-interest expense. For the nine months ended March 31, 2010, the
efficiency ratio increased to 60 percent from 52 percent in the nine months
ended March 31, 2009. The increase in the efficiency ratio was a
result of a decrease in net interest income (before provision for loan losses)
and an increase in non-interest expense, partly offset by an increase in
non-interest income.
Return on
average assets for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 increased 77 basis points to
0.10 percent from (0.67) percent in the same period last year. For
the nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, the return on average assets was
(0.19) percent and (0.74) percent, respectively, an improvement of 55 basis
points.
Return on
average equity for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 increased to 1.20 percent
from (8.69) percent for the same period last year. For the nine
months ended March 31, 2010, the return on average equity improved to (2.38)
percent from (9.62) percent for the same period last year.
Diluted
earnings per share for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 were $0.03, compared to
the diluted loss per share of $(0.41) for the quarter ended March 31,
2009. For the nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, the diluted
loss per share was $(0.26) and $(1.41), respectively.
Net
Interest Income:
For the Quarters Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. Net interest income (before the provision for loan
losses) decreased $1.1 million, or 10 percent, to $9.6 million for the quarter
ended March 31, 2010 from $10.7 million in the comparable period in fiscal 2009
due primarily to a decline in average earning assets and a lower net interest
margin. The average balance of earning assets decreased $140.6
million, or nine percent, to $1.35 billion in the third quarter of fiscal 2010
from $1.49 billion in the comparable period of fiscal 2009. The net
interest margin was 2.85 percent in the third quarter of fiscal 2010, down two
basis points from 2.87 percent for the same period of fiscal
2009. The decrease in the net interest margin during the third
quarter of fiscal 2010 was primarily attributable to an increase in
interest-earning deposits, primarily consisting of excess liquidity at the
Federal Reserve Bank – San
27
Francisco,
with an average yield of 25 basis points, much lower than the weighted average
yield of all earning assets.
For the Nine Months Ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. Net interest income (before the provision for
loan losses) decreased $2.9 million, or nine percent, to $29.3 million for the
nine months ended March 31, 2010 from $32.2 million in the comparable period in
fiscal 2009 due primarily to a decline in average earning assets and a lower net
interest margin. The average balance of earning assets decreased
$104.1 million to $1.42 billion in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 from
$1.52 billion in the comparable period of fiscal 2009. The net
interest margin was 2.75 percent in the first nine months of fiscal 2010, down
seven basis points from 2.82 percent for the same period of fiscal
2009. The decrease in the net interest margin during the first nine
months of fiscal 2010 was primarily attributable to an increase in
interest-earning deposits with a much lower average yield than the weighted
average yield of all earning assets.
Interest
Income:
For the Quarters Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. Total interest income decreased by $4.0 million, or
20 percent, to $16.5 million for the third quarter of fiscal 2010 from $20.5
million in the same quarter of fiscal 2009. This decrease was
primarily the result of a lower average earning asset yield and a lower average
balance of earning assets. The average yield on earning assets during
the third quarter of fiscal 2010 was 4.90 percent, 61 basis points lower than
the average yield of 5.51 percent during the same period of fiscal
2009. The average balance of earning assets decreased $140.6 million
to $1.35 billion during the third quarter of fiscal 2010 from $1.49 billion
during the comparable period of fiscal 2009.
Loans
receivable interest income decreased $2.8 million, or 15 percent, to $16.1
million in the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $18.9 million for the same
quarter of fiscal 2009. This decrease was attributable to a lower
average loan yield and a lower average loan balance. The average loan
yield during the third quarter of fiscal 2010 decreased 24 basis points to 5.54
percent from 5.78 percent during the same quarter last year. The
decrease in the average loan yield was primarily attributable to accrued
interest income reversals from newly classified non-accrual loans, the repricing
of adjustable rate loans to lower interest rates and payoffs on loans which
carried a higher average yield than the average yield of loans
receivable. The average balance of loans outstanding, including loans
held for sale, decreased $141.8 million, or 11 percent, to $1.16 billion during
the third quarter of fiscal 2010 from $1.30 billion in the same quarter of
fiscal 2009.
Interest
income from investment securities decreased $1.3 million, or 81 percent, to
$311,000 during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $1.6 million in the same
quarter of fiscal 2009. This decrease was primarily a result of a
decrease in the average balance and a decrease in average yield. The
average balance of investment securities decreased $103.9 million, or 73
percent, to $37.9 million during the third quarter of fiscal 2010 from $141.8
million during the same quarter of fiscal 2009. The decrease in the
average balance was primarily due to the sale of $65.3 million of investment
securities in August, September and December 2009 as well as scheduled and
accelerated principal payments on mortgage-backed securities. The
average yield on investment securities decreased 133 basis points to 3.28
percent during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from 4.61 percent during the
quarter ended March 31, 2009. The decrease in the average yield of
investment securities was primarily attributable to the sale of investment
securities with a higher average yield, the repricing of mortgage-backed
securities to lower interest rates and a lower net premium amortization ($9,000
in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to $63,000 in the comparable
quarter of fiscal 2009). The lower net premium amortization was
attributable to lower MBS principal payments with lower outstanding premiums
during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as compared to the same quarter last
year. During the third quarter of fiscal 2010, the Bank did not
purchase any investment securities, while $1.8 million of principal payments
were received on mortgage-backed securities.
In
February 2010, the FHLB – San Francisco declared a cash dividend for the quarter
ended December 31, 2009 at an annualized dividend rate of 0.27%; the $22,000
cash dividend was received in the third quarter of fiscal 2010. No
cash dividend was received in the comparable quarter last year. The
FHLB – San Francisco has not resumed its normally scheduled redemption of excess
capital stock held by member banks because of its stated desire to strengthen
its capital ratios.
For the Nine Months ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. Total interest income decreased by $11.3
million, or 17 percent, to $53.5 million for the first nine months of fiscal
2010 from $64.8 million in the comparable period of fiscal 2009. This
decrease was primarily the result of a lower average earning asset yield and a
lower average balance of earning assets. The average yield on earning
assets during the first nine months of fiscal 2010 was 5.03
28
percent,
64 basis points lower than the average yield of 5.67 percent during the same
period of fiscal 2009. The average balance of earning assets
decreased $104.1 million to $1.42 billion during the first nine months of fiscal
2010 from $1.52 billion during the comparable period of fiscal
2009.
Loans
receivable interest income decreased $7.8 million, or 13 percent, to $51.4
million in the nine months ended March 31, 2010 from $59.2 million for the same
period of fiscal 2009. This decrease was attributable to a lower
average loan yield and a lower average loan balance. The average loan
yield during the first nine months of fiscal 2010 decreased 30 basis points to
5.61 percent from 5.91 percent during the same period last year. The
decrease in the average loan yield was primarily attributable to accrued
interest income reversals from newly classified non-accrual loans, the repricing
of adjustable rate loans to lower interest rates and payoffs on loans which
carried a higher average yield than the average yield of loans
receivable. The average balance of loans outstanding, including loans
held for sale, decreased $112.9 million, or eight percent, to $1.22 billion
during the first nine months of fiscal 2010 from $1.33 billion in the same
period of fiscal 2009.
Interest
income from investment securities decreased $3.4 million, or 64 percent, to $1.9
million during the nine months ended March 31, 2010 from $5.3 million in the
same period of fiscal 2009. This decrease was primarily a result of a
decrease in the average balance and a decrease in average yield. The
average balance of investment securities decreased $84.4 million, or 57 percent,
to $64.2 million for the first nine months of fiscal 2010 from $148.6 million in
the same period of fiscal 2009. The decrease in the average balance
was primarily due to the sale of $65.3 million of investment securities for a
net gain of $2.3 million as well as scheduled and accelerated principal payments
on mortgage-backed securities. The average yield on investment
securities decreased 91 basis points to 3.88 percent during the nine months
ended March 31, 2010 from 4.79 percent during the same period ended March 31,
2009. The decrease in the average yield of investment securities was
primarily attributable to the sale of investment securities with a higher
average yield, the repricing of adjustable rate mortgage-backed securities to
lower interest rates and a slightly lower net premium amortization ($106,000 in
the first nine months of fiscal 2010 as compared to $110,000 in the comparable
period of fiscal 2009). The lower net premium amortization was
attributable to lower MBS principal payments with lower outstanding premiums in
the first nine months of fiscal 2010 as compared to the same period last
year. During the first nine months of fiscal 2010, the Bank did not
purchase any investment securities, while $19.1 million of principal payments
were received on mortgage-backed securities.
The FHLB
– San Francisco declared a $91,000 cash dividend on its stock in the first nine
months of fiscal 2010 as compared to the stock dividend of $324,000 in the first
nine months of fiscal 2009.
Interest
Expense:
For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. Total interest expense for the quarter ended March
31, 2010 was $6.9 million as compared to $9.8 million for the same period of
fiscal 2009, a decrease of $2.9 million, or 30 percent. This decrease
was primarily attributable to a lower average cost of interest-bearing
liabilities, particularly deposits, and to a much lesser extent, a lower average
balance of other interest-bearing liabilities. The average cost of
interest-bearing liabilities, principally deposits and borrowings, was 2.21
percent during the quarter ended March 31, 2010, down 63 basis points from 2.84
percent during the same period of fiscal 2009. The average balance of
interest-bearing liabilities, principally deposits and borrowings, decreased
$130.6 million, or nine percent, to $1.27 billion during the third quarter of
fiscal 2010 from $1.40 billion during the same period of fiscal
2009.
Interest
expense on deposits for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 was $3.6 million as
compared to $5.2 million for the same period of fiscal 2009, a decrease of $1.6
million, or 31 percent. The decrease in interest expense on deposits
was primarily attributable to a lower average cost, partly offset by a slightly
higher average balance. The average cost of deposits decreased to
1.54 percent during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from 2.26 percent during
the same quarter of fiscal 2009, a decrease of 72 basis points. The
decrease in the average cost of deposits was attributable primarily to new time
deposits with a lower average cost replacing maturing time deposits with a
higher average cost, consistent with declining short-term market interest
rates. The average balance of deposits increased $1.7 million to
$942.8 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $941.1 million
during the same period of fiscal 2009. The increase in the average
balance was primarily attributable to an increase in transaction (core)
deposits, partly offset by a decrease in time
deposits. Strategically, the Bank has been promoting core deposits
and competing less aggressively for time deposits. The increase in
transaction accounts was also attributable to the impact of depositors seeking
an alternative to lower yielding time deposits in light of the currently low
interest rate environment. The average balance of transaction
deposits to total deposits in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 was 46 percent,
compared to 35 percent in the same period of fiscal 2009.
29
Interest
expense on borrowings, consisting of FHLB – San Francisco advances, for the
quarter ended March 31, 2010 decreased $1.3 million, or 28 percent, to $3.3
million from $4.6 million for the same period of fiscal 2009. The
decrease in interest expense on borrowings was primarily a result of a lower
average balance, partly offset by a higher average cost. The average
balance of borrowings decreased $132.3 million, or 29 percent, to $328.0 million
during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $460.3 million during the same
period of fiscal 2009, consistent with the Corporation’s short-term deleveraging
strategy. The decrease in the average balance was due to scheduled
maturities and prepayment of advances. A total of $25.0 million of
advances were prepaid with a net prepayment gain of $155,000 in the third
quarter of fiscal 2010. The average cost of borrowings increased to
4.12 percent for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from 4.03 percent in the same
quarter of fiscal 2009, an increase of nine basis points.
For the Nine Months Ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. Total interest expense for the nine months
ended March 31, 2010 was $24.3 million as compared to $32.6 million for the same
period of fiscal 2009, a decrease of $8.3 million, or 25
percent. This decrease was primarily attributable to a lower average
cost of interest-bearing liabilities, particularly deposits, and a lower average
balance. The average cost of interest-bearing liabilities,
principally deposits and borrowings, was 2.40 percent during the nine months
ended March 31, 2010, down 65 basis points from 3.05 percent during the same
period of fiscal 2009. The average balance of interest-bearing
liabilities decreased $78.2 million, or five percent, to $1.35 billion during
the first nine months of fiscal 2010 from $1.43 billion during the same period
of fiscal 2009.
Interest
expense on deposits for the nine months ended March 31, 2010 was $12.4 million
as compared to $18.5 million for the same period of fiscal 2009, a decrease of
$6.1 million, or 33 percent. The decrease in interest expense on
deposits was primarily attributable to a lower average cost and a slightly lower
average balance. The average cost of deposits decreased to 1.73
percent during the nine months ended March 31, 2010 from 2.59 percent during the
same nine months of fiscal 2009, a decrease of 86 basis points. The
decrease in the average cost of deposits was attributable primarily to new time
deposits with a lower average cost replacing maturing time deposits with a
higher average cost, consistent with declining short-term market interest
rates. The average balance of deposits decreased $1.1 million to
$952.1 million during the nine months ended March 31, 2010 from $953.2 million
during the same period of fiscal 2009. The decline in the average
balance was primarily in time deposits, the result of the Bank’s strategic
decision to compete less aggressively for this product, partly offset by an
increase in transaction (core) deposits. The average balance of
transaction deposits to total deposits in the first nine months of fiscal 2010
was 42 percent, compared to 35 percent in the same period of fiscal
2009.
Interest
expense on borrowings, consisting of FHLB – San Francisco advances, for the nine
months ended March 31, 2010 decreased $2.2 million, or 16 percent, to $11.9
million from $14.1 million for the same period of fiscal 2009. The
decrease in interest expense on borrowings was primarily a result of a lower
average balance, partly offset by a slightly higher average cost. The
average balance of borrowings decreased $77.2 million, or 16 percent, to $394.7
million during the nine months ended March 31, 2010 from $471.9 million during
the same period of fiscal 2009, consistent with the Corporation’s short-term
deleveraging strategy. The decrease in the average balance was due to
the scheduled maturities and $102.0 million of prepayments with a net prepayment
gain of $52,000 in the first nine months of fiscal 2010. The average
cost of borrowings increased slightly to 4.00 percent for the nine months ended
March 31, 2010 from 3.98 percent in the same nine months of fiscal 2009, an
increase of two basis points.
30
The
following table depicts the average balance sheets for the quarters and nine
months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively:
Average
Balance Sheets
(Dollars
in thousands)
Quarter
Ended
|
Quarter
Ended
|
||||||||||
March
31, 2010
|
March
31, 2009
|
||||||||||
Average
|
Yield/
|
Average
|
Yield/
|
||||||||
Balance
|
Interest
|
Cost
|
Balance
|
Interest
|
Cost
|
||||||
Interest-earning
assets:
|
|||||||||||
Loans
receivable, net (1)
|
$
1,161,785
|
$
16,101
|
5.54%
|
$
1,303,625
|
$
18,850
|
5.78%
|
|||||
Investment
securities
|
37,878
|
311
|
3.28%
|
141,802
|
1,635
|
4.61%
|
|||||
FHLB
– San Francisco stock
|
33,023
|
22
|
0.27%
|
32,929
|
-
|
-%
|
|||||
Interest-earning
deposits
|
113,803
|
71
|
0.25%
|
8,707
|
6
|
0.28%
|
|||||
Total
interest-earning assets
|
1,346,489
|
16,505
|
4.90%
|
1,487,063
|
20,491
|
5.51%
|
|||||
Non
interest-earning assets
|
68,017
|
53,521
|
|||||||||
Total
assets
|
$
1,414,506
|
$
1,540,584
|
|||||||||
Interest-bearing
liabilities:
|
|||||||||||
Checking
and money market accounts (2)
|
$ 239,711
|
376
|
0.64%
|
$ 189,339
|
282
|
0.60%
|
|||||
Savings
accounts
|
192,325
|
468
|
0.99%
|
140,717
|
484
|
1.39%
|
|||||
Time
deposits
|
510,797
|
2,738
|
2.17%
|
611,032
|
4,479
|
2.97%
|
|||||
Total
deposits
|
942,833
|
3,582
|
1.54%
|
941,088
|
5,245
|
2.26%
|
|||||
Borrowings
|
327,996
|
3,330
|
4.12%
|
460,296
|
4,575
|
4.03%
|
|||||
Total
interest-bearing liabilities
|
1,270,829
|
6,912
|
2.21%
|
1,401,384
|
9,820
|
2.84%
|
|||||
Non
interest-bearing liabilities
|
19,939
|
20,934
|
|||||||||
Total
liabilities
|
1,290,768
|
1,422,318
|
|||||||||
Stockholders’
equity
|
123,738
|
118,266
|
|||||||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’
equity
|
|||||||||||
$
1,414,506
|
$
1,540,584
|
||||||||||
Net
interest income
|
$ 9,593
|
$
10,671
|
|||||||||
Interest
rate spread (3)
|
2.69%
|
2.67%
|
|||||||||
Net
interest margin (4)
|
2.85%
|
2.87%
|
|||||||||
Ratio
of average interest-earning
assets
to average interest-bearing
liabilities
|
|||||||||||
105.95%
|
106.11%
|
||||||||||
Return
(loss) on average assets
|
0.10%
|
(0.67)%
|
|||||||||
Return
(loss) on average equity
|
1.20%
|
(8.69)%
|
(1) | Includes loans held for sale and non-performing loans, as well as net deferred loan cost amortization of $121 and $142 for the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. |
(2) | Includes the average balance of non interest-bearing checking accounts of $44.7 million and $43.7 million during the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. |
(3) | Represents the difference between the weighted-average yield on all interest-earning assets and the weighted-average rate on all interest-bearing liabilities. |
(4) | Represents net interest income before provision for loan losses as a percentage of average interest-earning assets. |
31
Average
Balance Sheets
(Dollars
in thousands)
Nine
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
||||||||||
March
31, 2010
|
March
31, 2009
|
||||||||||
Average
|
Yield/
|
Average
|
Yield/
|
||||||||
Balance
|
Interest
|
Cost
|
Balance
|
Interest
|
Cost
|
||||||
Interest-earning
assets:
|
|||||||||||
Loans
receivable, net (1)
|
$
1,221,897
|
$
51,375
|
5.61%
|
$
1,334,841
|
$
59,156
|
5.91%
|
|||||
Investment
securities
|
64,162
|
1,869
|
3.88%
|
148,625
|
5,344
|
4.79%
|
|||||
FHLB
– San Francisco stock
|
33,023
|
91
|
0.37%
|
32,692
|
324
|
1.32%
|
|||||
Interest-earning
deposits
|
101,068
|
191
|
0.25%
|
8,167
|
16
|
0.26%
|
|||||
Total
interest-earning assets
|
1,420,150
|
53,526
|
5.03%
|
1,524,325
|
64,840
|
5.67%
|
|||||
Non
interest-earning assets
|
63,894
|
42,463
|
|||||||||
Total
assets
|
$
1,484,044
|
$
1,566,788
|
|||||||||
Interest-bearing
liabilities:
|
|||||||||||
Checking
and money market accounts (2)
|
$ 220,720
|
1,066
|
0.64%
|
$ 190,600
|
914
|
0.64%
|
|||||
Savings
accounts
|
178,563
|
1,492
|
1.11%
|
139,200
|
1,588
|
1.52%
|
|||||
Time
deposits
|
552,835
|
9,838
|
2.37%
|
623,383
|
16,047
|
3.43%
|
|||||
Total
deposits
|
952,118
|
12,396
|
1.73%
|
953,183
|
18,549
|
2.59%
|
|||||
Borrowings
|
394,727
|
11,854
|
4.00%
|
471,860
|
14,086
|
3.98%
|
|||||
Total
interest-bearing liabilities
|
1,346,845
|
24,250
|
2.40%
|
1,425,043
|
32,635
|
3.05%
|
|||||
Non
interest-bearing liabilities
|
20,195
|
20,462
|
|||||||||
Total
liabilities
|
1,367,040
|
1,445,505
|
|||||||||
Stockholders’
equity
|
117,004
|
121,283
|
|||||||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’
equity
|
|||||||||||
$
1,484,044
|
$
1,566,788
|
||||||||||
Net
interest income
|
$
29,276
|
$
32,205
|
|||||||||
Interest
rate spread (3)
|
2.63%
|
2.62%
|
|||||||||
Net
interest margin (4)
|
2.75%
|
2.82%
|
|||||||||
Ratio
of average interest-earning
assets
to average interest-bearing
liabilities
|
|||||||||||
105.44%
|
106.97%
|
||||||||||
Loss
on average assets
|
(0.19)%
|
(0.74)%
|
|||||||||
Loss
on average equity
|
(2.38)%
|
(9.62)%
|
(1) | Includes loans held for sale and non-performing loans, as well as net deferred loan cost amortization of $318 and $430 for the nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. |
(2) | Includes the average balance of non interest-bearing checking accounts of $43.8 million and $43.0 million during the nine months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. |
(3) | Represents the difference between the weighted-average yield on all interest-earning assets and the weighted-average rate on all interest-bearing liabilities. |
(4) | Represents net interest income before provision for loan losses as a percentage of average interest-earning assets. |
32
The
following table provides the rate/volume variances for the quarters and nine
months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively:
Rate/Volume
Variance
(In
Thousands)
Quarter
Ended March 31, 2010 Compared
|
|||||||||||
To
Quarter Ended March 31, 2009
|
|||||||||||
Increase
(Decrease) Due to
|
|||||||||||
Rate/
|
|||||||||||
Rate
|
Volume
|
Volume
|
Net
|
||||||||
Interest-earning
assets:
|
|||||||||||
Loans
receivable (1)
|
$ (784
|
)
|
$
(2,050
|
)
|
$ 85
|
$
(2,749
|
)
|
||||
Investment
securities
|
(472
|
)
|
(1,198
|
)
|
346
|
(1,324
|
)
|
||||
FHLB
– San Francisco stock
|
22
|
-
|
-
|
22
|
|||||||
Interest-bearing
deposits
|
(1
|
)
|
74
|
(8
|
)
|
65
|
|||||
Total
net change in income
on
interest-earning assets
|
|||||||||||
(1,235
|
)
|
(3,174
|
)
|
423
|
(3,986
|
)
|
|||||
|
|||||||||||
Interest-bearing
liabilities:
|
|||||||||||
Checking
and money market accounts
|
14
|
75
|
5
|
94
|
|||||||
Savings
accounts
|
(142
|
)
|
177
|
(51
|
)
|
(16
|
)
|
||||
Time
deposits
|
(1,205
|
)
|
(734
|
)
|
198
|
(1,741
|
)
|
||||
Borrowings
|
99
|
(1,315
|
)
|
(29
|
)
|
(1,245
|
)
|
||||
Total
net change in expense on
interest-bearing
liabilities
|
|||||||||||
(1,234
|
)
|
(1,797
|
)
|
123
|
(2,908
|
)
|
|||||
Net
(decrease) increase in net interest
income
|
|||||||||||
$ (1
|
)
|
$
(1,377
|
)
|
$
300
|
$
(1,078
|
)
|
(1) | Includes loans held for sale and non-performing loans. For purposes of calculating volume, rate and rate/volume variances, non-performing loans were included in the weighted-average balance outstanding. |
Nine
Months Ended March 31, 2010 Compared
|
|||||||||||
To
Nine Months Ended March 31, 2009
|
|||||||||||
Increase
(Decrease) Due to
|
|||||||||||
Rate/
|
|||||||||||
Rate
|
Volume
|
Volume
|
Net
|
||||||||
Interest-earning
assets:
|
|||||||||||
Loans
receivable (1)
|
$
(3,029
|
)
|
$
(5,006
|
)
|
$
254
|
$
(7,781
|
)
|
||||
Investment
securities
|
(1,017
|
)
|
(3,034
|
)
|
576
|
(3,475
|
)
|
||||
FHLB
– San Francisco stock
|
(234
|
)
|
3
|
(2
|
)
|
(233
|
)
|
||||
Interest-bearing
deposits
|
1
|
181
|
(7
|
)
|
175
|
||||||
Total
net change in income
on
interest-earning assets
|
|||||||||||
(4,279
|
)
|
(7,856
|
)
|
821
|
(11,314
|
)
|
|||||
|
|||||||||||
Interest-bearing
liabilities:
|
|||||||||||
Checking
and money market accounts
|
7
|
145
|
-
|
152
|
|||||||
Savings
accounts
|
(424
|
)
|
449
|
(121
|
)
|
(96
|
)
|
||||
Time
deposits
|
(4,953
|
)
|
(1,817
|
)
|
561
|
(6,209
|
)
|
||||
Borrowings
|
85
|
(2,305
|
)
|
(12
|
)
|
(2,232
|
)
|
||||
Total
net change in expense on
interest-bearing
liabilities
|
|||||||||||
(5,285
|
)
|
(3,528
|
)
|
428
|
(8,385
|
)
|
|||||
Net
increase (decrease) in net interest
income
|
|||||||||||
$ 1,006
|
$
(4,328
|
)
|
$
393
|
$
(2,929
|
)
|
(1) | Includes loans held for sale and non-performing loans. For purposes of calculating volume, rate and rate/volume variances, non-performing loans were included in the weighted-average balance outstanding. |
33
Provision
for Loan Losses:
For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. During the third quarter of fiscal 2010, the
Corporation recorded a provision for loan losses of $2.3 million, compared to a
provision for loan losses of $13.5 million during the same period of fiscal
2009. The loan loss provision in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 was
primarily attributable to loan classification downgrades ($3.3 million), partly
offset by a decrease in loans held for investment ($952,000 loan loss provision
recovery).
For the Nine Months Ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. During the first nine months of fiscal 2010,
the Corporation recorded a provision for loan losses of $21.8 million, compared
to a provision for loan losses of $35.8 million during the same period of fiscal
2009. The loan loss provision in the first nine months of fiscal 2010
was primarily attributable to loan classification downgrades ($14.3 million) and
an increase in the general loan loss provision for loans held for investment
($10.7 million, inclusive of a $9.0 million increase resulting from the
refinement of the general loan loss provision described below), partly offset by
a decrease in loans held for investment ($3.2 million loan loss provision
recovery).
The
general loan loss allowance was refined through quantitative and qualitative
adjustments to include specific loan loss allowances in the loss experience
analysis and to reflect the impact on loans held for investment resulting from
the deteriorating general economic conditions of the U.S. and California economy
such as the higher unemployment rates, lower retail sales, and declining home
prices in California. See related discussion on “Asset Quality” on
page 38.
At March
31, 2010, the allowance for loan losses was $50.8 million, comprised of $26.6
million of general loan loss reserves and $24.2 million of specific loan loss
reserves, in comparison to the allowance for loan losses of $45.4 million at
June 30, 2009, comprised of $20.1 million of general loan loss reserves and
$25.3 million of specific loan loss reserves. The allowance for loan
losses as a percentage of gross loans held for investment was 4.69 percent at
March 31, 2010 compared to 3.75 percent at June 30, 2009. Management
considers, based on currently available information, the allowance for loan
losses sufficient to absorb potential losses inherent in loans held for
investment.
The
allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level sufficient to provide for
estimated losses based on evaluating known and inherent risks in the loans held
for investment and upon management’s continuing analysis of the factors
underlying the quality of the loans held for investment. These
factors include changes in the size and composition of the loans held for
investment, actual loan loss experience, current economic conditions, detailed
analysis of individual loans for which full collectability may not be assured,
and determination of the realizable value of the collateral securing the
loans. Provisions for loan losses are charged against operations on a
monthly basis, as necessary, to maintain the allowance at appropriate
levels. Although management believes it uses the best information
available to make such determinations, there can be no assurance that
regulators, in reviewing the Bank’s loans held for investment, will not request
that the Bank significantly increase its allowance for loan
losses. Future adjustments to the allowance for loan losses may be
necessary and results of operations could be significantly and adversely
affected as a result of economic, operating, regulatory, and other conditions
beyond the control of the Bank.
34
The
following table is provided to disclose additional details on the Corporation’s
allowance for loan losses:
For
the Quarter Ended
|
For
the Nine Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
March
31,
|
March
31,
|
|||||||||||
(Dollars
in Thousands)
|
2010
|
2009
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
Allowance
at beginning of period
|
$
55,364
|
$
34,953
|
$
45,445
|
$
19,898
|
||||||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
2,322
|
13,541
|
21,843
|
35,809
|
||||||||
Recoveries:
|
||||||||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
||||||||||||
Single-family
|
149
|
44
|
442
|
155
|
||||||||
Construction
|
-
|
21
|
47
|
71
|
||||||||
Consumer
loans
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
||||||||
Total
recoveries
|
149
|
65
|
489
|
227
|
||||||||
Charge-offs:
|
||||||||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
||||||||||||
Single-family
|
(6,522
|
)
|
(6,350
|
)
|
(16,215
|
)
|
(13,610
|
)
|
||||
Multi-family
|
(205
|
)
|
-
|
(450
|
)
|
-
|
||||||
Commercial
real estate
|
(254
|
)
|
-
|
(254
|
)
|
-
|
||||||
Construction
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(73
|
)
|
|||||||
Other
|
-
|
(29
|
)
|
-
|
(67
|
)
|
||||||
Consumer
loans
|
(5
|
)
|
(2
|
)
|
(9
|
)
|
(6
|
)
|
||||
Total
charge-offs
|
(6,986
|
)
|
(6,381
|
)
|
(16,928
|
)
|
(13,756
|
)
|
||||
Net
charge-offs
|
(6,837
|
)
|
(6,316
|
)
|
(16,439
|
)
|
(13,529
|
)
|
||||
Balance
at end of period
|
$
50,849
|
$
42,178
|
$
50,849
|
$
42,178
|
||||||||
Allowance
for loan losses as a
percentage
of gross loans held for
investment
at the end of the period
|
||||||||||||
4.69%
|
3.36%
|
4.69%
|
3.36%
|
|||||||||
Net
charge-offs as a percentage of
average
loans receivable, net, during
the
period (annualized)
|
||||||||||||
2.35%
|
1.94%
|
1.79%
|
1.35%
|
|||||||||
Allowance
for loan losses as a
percentage
of non-performing loans
at
the end of the period
|
||||||||||||
68.86%
|
62.82%
|
68.86%
|
62.82%
|
Non-Interest
Income:
For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. Total non-interest income decreased $3.5 million, or
55 percent, to $2.9 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $6.4
million during the same period of fiscal 2009. The decrease was
primarily attributable to a decrease in the gain on sale of loans, partly offset
by an improved net result on sale and operations of real estate owned that was
acquired in the settlement of loans.
The net
gain on sale of loans decreased $4.7 million, or 77 percent, to $1.4 million for
the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $6.1 million in the same quarter of fiscal
2009. Total loans sold for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 were
$343.0 million, an increase of $42.6 million or 14 percent, from $300.4 million
for the same quarter last year. The average loan sale margin for PBM
during the third quarter of fiscal 2010 was 0.36 percent, down 97 basis points
from 1.33 percent in the same period of fiscal 2009. The gain on sale
of loans for the third quarter of fiscal 2010 includes a $1.2 million recourse
provision on loans sold that are subject to repurchase, compared to a $378,000
recourse provision in the comparable quarter last year. The gain on
sale of loans also includes an unfavorable fair-value adjustment on derivative
financial instruments pursuant to ASC 815, a loss of $(1.4) million, in the
third
35
quarter
of fiscal 2010 as compared to a favorable fair-value adjustment, a gain of $2.5
million, in the same period last year. As of March 31, 2010, the fair
value of derivative financial instruments was a gain of $1.2 million, compared
to a gain of $2.0 million at June 30, 2009 and a gain of $2.8 million at March
31, 2009. As of March 31, 2010, the total recourse reserve for loans
sold that are subject to repurchase was $6.1 million, compared to $3.4 million
at June 30, 2009 and $3.1 million at March 31, 2009.
Total
loans originated for sale decreased slightly to $359.2 million in the third
quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to $366.4 million during the same period last
year. The loan origination volumes were achieved as a result of
favorable liquidity in the secondary mortgage markets particularly in FHA/VA,
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan products, and an increase in activity resulting
from relatively low mortgage interest rates. The mortgage banking environment
remains highly volatile as a result of the well-publicized weakness of the
single-family real estate market. In addition, purchases of
mortgage-backed securities by the U.S. government have been curtailed and a tax
credit for homebuyers expired on April 30, 2010. It is too soon to
determine the longer term impact to the mortgage and housing market as the U.S.
government emergency actions are removed.
The net
gain on sale and operations of real estate owned acquired in the settlement of
loans was $58,000 in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 compared to a net loss of
$(952,000) in the same quarter last year. The improved result was due
primarily to the improvement in the real estate market and real estate values,
relatively low mortgage interest rates and favorable liquidity in the secondary
mortgage market. Twenty-five real estate owned properties were sold
in the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as compared to 28 properties sold in the
quarter ended March 31, 2009. See the related discussion on “Asset
Quality” on page 38.
For the Nine Months Ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. Total non-interest income increased $5.4
million, or 48 percent, to $16.6 million during the nine months ended March 31,
2010 from $11.2 million during the same period of fiscal 2009. The
increase was primarily attributable to an increase in the gain on sale of loans,
an increase in gain on sale of investment securities and a net gain on sale and
operations of real estate owned that was acquired in the settlement of
loans.
The net
gain on sale of loans increased $1.1 million, or 13 percent, to $9.8 million for
the nine months ended March 31, 2010 from $8.7 million in the same period of
fiscal 2009. Total loans sold for the nine months ended March 31,
2010 were $1.31 billion, an increase of $689.7 million or 112 percent, from
$616.8 million for the same period last year. The average loan sale
margin for PBM during the first nine months of fiscal 2010 was 0.73 percent,
down 36 basis points from 1.09 percent in the same period of fiscal
2009. The gain on sale of loans for the first nine months of fiscal
2010 includes a $4.2 million recourse provision on loans sold that are subject
to repurchase, compared to a $2.7 million recourse provision in the comparable
period last year. The gain on sale of loans also includes an
unfavorable fair-value adjustment on derivative financial instruments pursuant
to ASC 815, a loss of $(790,000), in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 as
compared to a gain of $3.1 million in the same period last year. The
mortgage banking environment has shown improvement as a result of relatively low
mortgage interest rates but remains volatile.
Total
loans originated for sale increased to $1.32 billion in the first nine months of
fiscal 2010 as compared to $701.0 million during the same period last
year.
A total
of $65.3 million of investment securities, comprised of U.S. government
sponsored enterprise MBS and U.S. government agency MBS, were sold in the nine
months ended March 31, 2010 for a net gain of $2.3 million as part of the
Corporation’s short-term deleveraging strategy. For the nine months
ended March 31, 2009, a $356,000 gain on sale of equity investments was
realized.
The net
gain on sale and operations of real estate owned acquired in the settlement of
loans was $247,000 in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 compared to a net
loss of $(1.8) million in the same period last year. A total of 115
real estate owned properties were sold in the nine months ended March 31, 2010
as compared to 75 properties sold in the nine months ended March 31,
2009.
36
Non-Interest
Expense:
For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. Total non-interest expense in the quarter ended
March 31, 2010 was $9.5 million, an increase of $1.6 million or 20 percent, as
compared to $7.9 million in the same quarter of fiscal 2009. The
increase in non-interest expense was primarily the result of a significant
increase in mortgage banking operating expenses and higher deposit insurance
premiums and regulatory assessments.
Total
compensation increased $1.1 million, or 22 percent, to $6.1 million in the third
quarter of fiscal 2010 from $5.0 million in the same period of fiscal
2009. The increase was primarily attributable to compensation
incentives related to higher retail loan originations (refer to “Loan Volume
Activities” on page 45 for details), partly offset by lower deferred
compensation costs.
Total
deposit insurance premiums and regulatory assessments increased $233,000, or 58
percent, to $636,000 in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 from $403,000 in the
same period of fiscal 2009. The increase was primarily attributable
to higher FDIC deposit insurance premiums.
For the Nine Months Ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. Total non-interest expense in the nine months
ended March 31, 2010 was $27.7 million, an increase of $5.1 million or 23
percent, as compared to $22.6 million in the same period of fiscal
2009. The increase in non-interest expense was primarily the result
of a significant increase in mortgage banking operating expenses and higher
deposit insurance premiums and regulatory assessments.
Total
compensation increased $2.6 million, or 18 percent, to $16.8 million in the
first nine months of fiscal 2010 from $14.2 million in the same period of fiscal
2009. The increase was primarily attributable to compensation
incentives related to higher mortgage banking loan volume (refer to “Loan Volume
Activities” on page 45 for details), partly offset by lower deferred
compensation costs.
Total
deposit insurance premiums and regulatory assessments increased $1.3 million, or
130 percent, to $2.3 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 from $1.0
million in the same period of fiscal 2009. The increase was primarily
attributable to higher FDIC deposit insurance premiums.
Total
other operating expenses increased $837,000, or 30 percent, to $3.6 million in
the first nine months of fiscal 2010 from $2.8 million at the same period last
year. The increase was primarily due to higher costs related to the
increase in mortgage banking loan volume (e.g. appraisal, credit report and
contract underwriting costs) and an increase in business/corporate insurance
premiums.
Provision
(benefit) for income taxes:
The
income tax provisions reflect accruals for taxes at the applicable rates for
federal income tax and California franchise tax based upon reported pre-tax
income, adjusted for the effect of all permanent differences between income for
tax and financial reporting purposes, such as non-deductible stock-based
compensation, bank-owned life insurance policies and certain California
tax-exempt loans. Therefore, there are normal fluctuations in the
effective rate from period to period based on the relationship of net permanent
differences to income before tax.
For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
and 2009. The income tax provision was $229,000 for the
quarter ended March 31, 2010 as compared to an income tax benefit of $(1.9)
million during the same period of fiscal 2009. The effective income
tax rate for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 was 38.2 percent as compared to
42.0 percent in the same quarter last year. The decrease in the
effective income tax rate was primarily the result of a lower percentage of
permanent tax differences relative to income or loss before
taxes. The Corporation believes that the effective income tax rate
applied in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 reflects its current income tax
obligations.
For the Nine Months Ended March 31,
2010 and 2009. The income tax benefit was $(1.6) million for
the nine months ended March 31, 2010 as compared to an income tax benefit of
$(6.2) million during the same period of fiscal 2009. The effective
income tax rate for the nine months ended March 31, 2010 increased slightly to
43.1 percent as compared to 41.5 percent for the same period last
year. The increase in the effective income tax rate was primarily the
result of a higher percentage of permanent tax differences relative to income or
loss before taxes. The Corporation believes that the effective income
tax rate applied in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 reflects its current
income tax obligations.
37
Asset
Quality
Non-performing
loans, consisting solely of non-accrual loans with collateral primarily located
in Southern California, increased to $73.8 million at March 31, 2010 from $71.8
million at June 30, 2009. The non-performing loans at March 31, 2010
were primarily comprised of 201 single-family loans ($62.7 million); seven
multi-family loans ($6.6 million); five commercial real estate loans ($2.8
million); 11 construction loans ($692,000, nine of which, or $24,000, are
associated with the previously disclosed Coachella, California construction loan
fraud); seven commercial business loans ($144,000); and eight single-family
loans repurchased from, or unable to sell to investors ($905,000). No
interest accruals were made for loans that were past due 90 days or more or if
the loans were deemed impaired.
When a
loan is considered impaired as defined by ASC 310, “Receivables,” the
Corporation measures impairment based on the present value of expected future
cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate. However,
if the loan is “collateral-dependent” or foreclosure is probable, impairment is
measured based on the fair value of the collateral. At least
quarterly, management reviews impaired loans. When the measure of an
impaired loan is less than the recorded investment in the loan, the Corporation
records a specific valuation allowance equal to the excess of the recorded
investment in the loan over its measured value, which is updated
quarterly. A general loan loss allowance is provided on loans not
specifically identified as impaired (non-impaired loans). The general
loan loss allowance is determined based on a quantitative and a qualitative
analysis using a loss migration methodology. The loans are classified
by type and loan grade, and the historical loss migration is tracked for the
various stratifications. Loss experience is quantified for the most
recent four quarters, and that loss experience is applied to the stratified
portfolio at each quarter end. The qualitative analysis includes
current unemployment rates, retail sales, gross domestic product, real estate
value trends, and commercial real estate vacancy rates, among other current
economic data.
As of
March 31, 2010, restructured loans increased to $60.4 million from $40.9 million
at June 30, 2009. At March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2009, $30.2 million
and $29.8 million, respectively, of these restructured loans were classified as
non-performing. As of March 31, 2010, 85 percent, or $51.4 million,
of the restructured loans have a current payment status; this compares to 83
percent, or $33.9 million of restructured loans that had a current payment
status as of June 30, 2009.
The
non-performing loans as a percentage of loans held for investment increased to
7.15 percent at March 31, 2010 from 6.16 percent at June 30,
2009. Real estate owned was $17.6 million (75 properties) at March
31, 2010, an increase of $1.2 million or seven percent from $16.4 million (80
properties) at June 30, 2009. Non-performing assets, which includes
non-performing loans and real estate owned, as a percentage of total assets
increased to 6.50 percent at March 31, 2010 from 5.59 percent at June 30,
2009. Restructured loans which are performing in accordance with
their modified terms and are not otherwise classified non-accrual are not
included in non-performing assets.
During
the third quarter of fiscal 2010, the Bank did not repurchase any loans from
investors as compared to $1.3 million repurchased in the same period last year,
fulfilling certain recourse/repurchase covenants in the respective loan sale
agreements. For the first nine months of fiscal 2010 and 2009, the
Bank repurchased $368,000 and $2.8 million, respectively, although some
repurchase requests were settled that did not result in the repurchase of the
loan itself. As of March 31, 2010, the total recourse reserve for
loans sold that are subject to repurchase was $6.1 million, compared to $3.4
million at June 30, 2009 and $3.1 million at March 31, 2009. Many of
the repurchases and loans that could not be sold were the result of borrower
fraud. The Bank has implemented tighter underwriting standards to
reduce this problem, including higher credit scores, generally lower
debt-to-income ratios, and verification of income and assets, among
others.
A decline
in real estate values subsequent to the time of origination of the Corporation’s
real estate secured loans could result in higher loan delinquency levels,
foreclosures, provisions for loan losses and net charge-offs. Real
estate values and real estate markets are beyond the Corporation’s control and
are generally affected by changes in national, regional or local economic
conditions and other factors. These factors include fluctuations in
interest rates and the availability of loans to potential purchasers, changes in
tax laws and other governmental statutes, regulations and policies and acts of
nature, such as earthquakes and national disasters particular to California
where substantially all of the Corporation’s real estate collateral is
located. If real estate values continue to decline further from the
levels described in the following tables (which were calculated at the time of
loan origination), the value of real estate collateral securing the
Corporation’s loans could be significantly reduced. The Corporation’s
ability to recover on defaulted loans by foreclosing and selling the real estate
collateral would then be diminished and it would
38
be more
likely to suffer losses on defaulted loans. The Corporation does not
periodically update the loan to value ratio (“LTV”) on its loans held for
investment by obtaining new appraisals or broker price opinions (nor does the
Corporation intend to do so in the future as a result of the costs and
inefficiencies associated with completing the task) unless a specific loan has
demonstrated deterioration or the Corporation receives a loan modification
request from a borrower (in which case specific loan valuation allowances are
established, if required). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that
the LTV ratios disclosed in the following tables may be understated in
comparison to their current LTV ratios as a result of their year of origination,
the subsequent general decline in real estate values that may have occurred and
the specific location of the individual properties. The Corporation
cannot quantify the current LTVs of its loans held for investment nor quantify
the impact the decline in real estate values has had to the current LTVs of its
loans held for investment by loan type, geography, or other
subsets.
The
following table describes certain credit risk characteristics of the
Corporation’s single-family, first trust deed, mortgage loans held for
investment as of March 31, 2010:
Weighted-
|
Weighted-
|
Weighted-
|
||
Outstanding
|
Average
|
Average
|
Average
|
|
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Balance
(1)
|
FICO
(2)
|
LTV
(3)
|
Seasoning
(4)
|
Interest
only
|
$
354,533
|
735
|
73%
|
3.75
years
|
Stated
income (5)
|
$
313,556
|
732
|
72%
|
4.26
years
|
FICO
less than or equal to 660
|
$ 18,398
|
641
|
70%
|
5.00
years
|
Over
30-year amortization
|
$ 20,447
|
739
|
68%
|
4.53
years
|
(1)
|
The
outstanding balance presented on this table may overlap more than one
category. Of the outstanding balance, $60.0 million of
“Interest Only,” $52.6 million of “Stated Income,” $2.8 million of “FICO
Less Than or Equal to 660,” and $2.7 million of “Over 30-Year
Amortization” balances were
non-performing.
|
(2)
|
The
FICO score represents the creditworthiness of a borrower based on the
borrower’s credit history, as reported by an independent third party at
the time of origination. A higher FICO score indicates a
greater degree of creditworthiness. Bank regulators have issued
guidance stating that a FICO score of 660 and below is indicative of a
“subprime” borrower.
|
(3)
|
LTV
is the ratio calculated by dividing the current loan balance by the
original appraised value of the real estate
collateral.
|
(4)
|
Seasoning
describes the number of years since the funding date of the
loan.
|
(5)
|
Stated
income is defined as borrower provided income which is not subject to
verification during the loan origination
process.
|
The
following table summarizes the amortization schedule of the Corporation’s
interest only single-family, first trust deed, mortgage loans held for
investment, including the percentage of those which are identified as
non-performing or 30 – 89 days delinquent as of March 31, 2010:
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Balance
|
Non-Performing
(1)
|
30
- 89 Days
Delinquent
(1)
|
Fully
amortize in the next 12 months
|
$ 54,873
|
19%
|
-%
|
Fully
amortize between 1 year and 5 years
|
15,193
|
44%
|
2%
|
Fully
amortize after 5 years
|
284,467
|
15%
|
1%
|
Total
|
$
354,533
|
17%
|
1%
|
(1)
|
As
a percentage of each category.
|
The
following table summarizes the interest rate reset (repricing) schedule of the
Corporation’s stated income single-family, first trust deed, mortgage loans held
for investment, including the percentage of those which are identified as
non-performing or 30 – 89 days delinquent as of March 31, 2010:
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Balance
(1)
|
Non-Performing
(1)
|
30
- 89 Days
Delinquent
(1)
|
Interest
rate reset in the next 12 months
|
$
203,093
|
16%
|
1%
|
Interest
rate reset between 1 year and 5 years
|
110,045
|
18%
|
2%
|
Interest
rate reset after 5 years
|
418
|
-%
|
-%
|
Total
|
$
313,556
|
17%
|
2%
|
(1)
|
As
a percentage of each category. Also, the loan balances and
percentages on this table may overlap with the interest only
single-family, first trust deed, mortgage loans held for investment
table.
|
39
The reset
of interest rates on adjustable rate mortgage loans (primarily interest only
single-family loans) to a fully-amortizing status has not created a payment
shock for most of the Bank’s borrowers primarily because the loans are repricing
at a 2.75% margin over six-month LIBOR which has resulted in a lower interest
rate than the borrowers pre-adjustment interest rate. Management
expects that the economic recovery will be slow to develop, which may translate
to an extended period of lower interest rates and a reduced risk of mortgage
payment shock for the foreseeable future. The higher delinquency
levels experienced by the Bank during fiscal 2009 and the first nine months of
fiscal 2010 were primarily due to higher unemployment, the recession and the
decline in real estate values, particularly in Southern California.
The
following table describes certain credit risk characteristics, geographic
locations and the year of loan origination of the Corporation’s single-family,
first trust deed, mortgage loans held for investment, at March 31,
2010:
Year
of Origination
|
|||||||||||
2002
&
Prior
|
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
Total
|
||
Loan
balance (in thousands)
|
$13,499
|
$23,212
|
$85,157
|
$190,501
|
$150,907
|
$95,870
|
$42,735
|
$1,656
|
-
|
$603,537
|
|
Weighted-average
LTV (1)
|
52%
|
70%
|
76%
|
72%
|
70%
|
73%
|
75%
|
57%
|
-
|
72%
|
|
Weighted-average
age (in years)
|
14.01
|
6.60
|
5.54
|
4.69
|
3.71
|
2.72
|
1.99
|
0.85
|
-
|
4.33
|
|
Weighted-average
FICO (2)
|
696
|
722
|
722
|
731
|
742
|
734
|
743
|
750
|
-
|
733
|
|
Number
of loans
|
145
|
90
|
256
|
490
|
338
|
185
|
78
|
7
|
-
|
1,589
|
|
Geographic
breakdown (%)
|
|||||||||||
Inland
Empire
|
36%
|
40%
|
30%
|
31%
|
29%
|
29%
|
26%
|
100%
|
-
|
30%
|
|
Southern
California (3)
|
58%
|
56%
|
63%
|
61%
|
52%
|
43%
|
48%
|
-%
|
-
|
55%
|
|
Other
California (4)
|
4%
|
4%
|
6%
|
7%
|
17%
|
27%
|
26%
|
-%
|
-
|
14%
|
|
Other
States
|
2%
|
-%
|
1%
|
1%
|
2%
|
1%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-
|
1%
|
|
Total
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
-
|
100%
|
(1)
|
LTV
is the ratio calculated by dividing the current loan balance by the
original appraised value of the real estate
collateral.
|
(2)
|
At
time of loan origination.
|
(3)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire.
|
(4)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire and Southern
California.
|
The
following table describes certain credit risk characteristics, geographic
locations and the year of loan origination of the Corporation’s multi-family
loans held for investment, at March 31, 2010:
Year
of Origination
|
|||||||||||
2002
&
Prior
|
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
Total
|
||
Loan
balance (in thousands)
|
$6,116
|
$17,085
|
$41,780
|
$57,526
|
$103,727
|
$102,163
|
$16,508
|
$1,624
|
$515
|
$347,044
|
|
Weighted-average
LTV (1)
|
39%
|
56%
|
51%
|
54%
|
56%
|
57%
|
52%
|
50%
|
69%
|
55%
|
|
Weighted-average
DCR (2)
|
1.89x
|
1.43x
|
1.46x
|
1.29x
|
1.27x
|
1.25x
|
1.40x
|
1.21x
|
1.28x
|
1.31x
|
|
Weighted-average
age (in years)
|
9.85
|
6.63
|
5.76
|
4.74
|
3.79
|
2.73
|
1.93
|
1.12
|
0.01
|
4.01
|
|
Weighted-average
FICO (3)
|
740
|
731
|
710
|
709
|
712
|
701
|
755
|
735
|
777
|
716
|
|
Number
of loans
|
15
|
30
|
57
|
92
|
116
|
122
|
22
|
1
|
2
|
457
|
|
Geographic
breakdown (%)
|
|||||||||||
Inland
Empire
|
36%
|
5%
|
21%
|
7%
|
12%
|
3%
|
9%
|
-%
|
-%
|
10%
|
|
Southern
California (4)
|
64%
|
87%
|
75%
|
65%
|
60%
|
83%
|
89%
|
100%
|
-%
|
72%
|
|
Other
California (5)
|
-%
|
8%
|
3%
|
27%
|
25%
|
14%
|
2%
|
-%
|
100%
|
17%
|
|
Other
States
|
-%
|
-%
|
1%
|
1%
|
3%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
1%
|
|
Total
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
(1)
|
LTV
is the ratio calculated by dividing the current loan balance by the
original appraised value of the real estate
collateral.
|
(2)
|
Debt
Coverage Ratio (“DCR”) at time of
origination.
|
(3)
|
At
time of loan origination.
|
(4)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire.
|
(5)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire and Southern
California.
|
40
The
following table summarizes the interest rate reset or maturity schedule of the
Corporation’s multi-family loans held for investment, including the percentage
of those which are identified as non-performing, 30 – 89 days delinquent or not
fully amortizing as of March 31, 2010:
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Balance
|
Non-
Performing
(1)
|
30
- 89 Days
Delinquent
(1)
|
Percentage
Not
Fully
Amortizing
(1)
|
Interest
rate reset or mature in the next 12 months
|
$
160,535
|
3%
|
-%
|
10%
|
Interest
rate reset or mature between 1 year and 5 years
|
144,576
|
2%
|
-%
|
2%
|
Interest
rate reset or mature after 5 years
|
41,933
|
-%
|
-%
|
18%
|
Total
|
$
347,044
|
3%
|
-%
|
8%
|
(1)
|
As
a percentage of each category.
|
The
following table describes certain credit risk characteristics, geographic
locations and the year of loan origination of the Corporation’s commercial real
estate loans held for investment, at March 31, 2010:
Year
of Origination
|
|||||||||||
2002
&
Prior
|
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
Total
(5)
(6)
|
||
Loan
balance (in thousands)
|
$9,837
|
$12,808
|
$12,382
|
$16,835
|
$22,383
|
$21,526
|
$6,289
|
$11,253
|
-
|
$113,313
|
|
Weighted-average
LTV (1)
|
47%
|
46%
|
50%
|
49%
|
57%
|
55%
|
38%
|
60%
|
-
|
52%
|
|
Weighted-average
DCR (2)
|
1.44x
|
1.64x
|
2.27x
|
2.14x
|
2.37x
|
2.39x
|
1.74x
|
1.06x
|
-
|
2.00x
|
|
Weighted-average
age (in years)
|
10.03
|
6.76
|
5.72
|
4.71
|
3.65
|
2.76
|
1.93
|
0.75
|
-
|
4.39
|
|
Weighted-average
FICO (2)
|
736
|
729
|
713
|
699
|
721
|
716
|
756
|
722
|
-
|
719
|
|
Number
of loans
|
16
|
21
|
20
|
22
|
26
|
24
|
10
|
5
|
-
|
144
|
|
Geographic
breakdown (%):
|
|||||||||||
Inland
Empire
|
90%
|
53%
|
46%
|
66%
|
23%
|
44%
|
7%
|
86%
|
-
|
50%
|
|
Southern
California (3)
|
9%
|
47%
|
54%
|
34%
|
76%
|
47%
|
93%
|
-%
|
-
|
46%
|
|
Other
California (4)
|
1%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
1%
|
9%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-
|
2%
|
|
Other
States
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
-%
|
14%
|
-
|
2%
|
|
Total
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
-
|
100%
|
(1) |
LTV
is the ratio calculated by dividing the current loan balance by the
original appraised value of the real estate collateral.
|
(2) | At time of loan origination. |
(3) | Other than the Inland Empire. |
(4) | Other than the Inland Empire and Southern California. |
(5) |
Comprised
of the following: $28.4 million in Retail; $27.3 million in Office; $11.6
million in Mixed Use; $10.7 million in Light Industrial/Manufacturing;
$10.6 million in Medical/Dental Office; $5.9 million in Warehouse; $3.7
million in Restaurant/Fast Food; $3.6 million in Mini-Storage; $3.1
million in Research and Development; $2.6 million in Mobile Home Park;
$2.0 million in School; $1.9 million in Hotel and Motel; $1.1 million in
Automotive – Non Gasoline; and $803,000 in Other.
|
(6) |
Consisting
of $73.2 million or 64.6% in investment properties and $40.1 million or
35.4% in owner occupied properties.
|
The
following table summarizes the interest rate reset or maturity schedule of the
Corporation’s commercial real estate loans held for investment, including the
percentage of those which are identified as non-performing, 30 – 89 days
delinquent or not fully amortizing as of March 31, 2010:
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Balance
|
Non-
Performing
(1)
|
30
- 89 Days
Delinquent
(1)
|
Percentage
Not
Fully
Amortizing
(1)
|
Interest
rate reset or mature in the next 12 months
|
$ 51,381
|
3%
|
-%
|
28%
|
Interest
rate reset or mature between 1 year and 5 years
|
45,785
|
3%
|
-%
|
10%
|
Interest
rate reset or mature after 5 years
|
16,147
|
-%
|
-%
|
61%
|
Total
|
$
113,313
|
3%
|
-%
|
25%
|
(1)
|
As
a percentage of each category.
|
41
The
following table sets forth information with respect to the Bank’s non-performing
assets and restructured loans, net of specific loan loss reserves at the dates
indicated:
At
March 31,
|
At
June 30,
|
|||||
2010
|
2009
|
|||||
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
||||||
Loans
on non-accrual status:
|
||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
||||||
Single-family
|
$
37,670
|
$
35,434
|
||||
Multi-family
|
4,016
|
4,930
|
||||
Commercial
real estate
|
1,571
|
1,255
|
||||
Construction
|
373
|
250
|
||||
Commercial
business loans
|
-
|
198
|
||||
Total
|
43,630
|
42,067
|
||||
Accruing
loans past due 90 days or
|
||||||
more
|
-
|
-
|
||||
Restructured
loans on non-accrual status:
|
||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
||||||
Single-family
|
25,982
|
23,695
|
||||
Multi-family
|
2,540
|
-
|
||||
Commercial
real estate
|
1,224
|
1,406
|
||||
Construction
|
319
|
2,037
|
||||
Other
|
-
|
1,565
|
||||
Commercial
business loans
|
144
|
1,048
|
||||
Total
|
30,209
|
29,751
|
||||
Total
non-performing loans
|
73,839
|
71,818
|
||||
Real
estate owned, net
|
17,555
|
16,439
|
||||
Total
non-performing assets
|
$
91,394
|
$
88,257
|
||||
Restructured
loans on accrual status:
|
||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
||||||
Single-family
|
$
27,594
|
$
10,880
|
||||
Commercial
real estate
|
537
|
-
|
||||
Other
|
1,292
|
240
|
||||
Commercial
business loans
|
750
|
-
|
||||
Total
|
$
30,173
|
$
11,120
|
||||
Non-performing
loans as a percentage of loans held for investment, net
of
allowance for loan losses
|
7.15%
|
6.16%
|
||||
Non-performing
loans as a percentage of total assets
|
5.25%
|
4.55%
|
||||
Non-performing
assets as a percentage of total assets
|
6.50%
|
5.59%
|
42
The
following table describes the non-performing loans by the year of origination as
of March 31, 2010:
Year
of Origination
|
|||||||||||
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
2002
& Prior
|
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
Total
|
|
Mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||||
Single-family
|
$
132
|
$
1,288
|
$
11,636
|
$
22,866
|
$
14,494
|
$
8,044
|
$
5,107
|
$ 85
|
-
|
$
63,652
|
|
Multi-family
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,300
|
4,256
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
6,556
|
|
Commercial
real estate
|
-
|
-
|
1,571
|
663
|
561
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,795
|
|
Construction
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
342
|
350
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
692
|
|
Commercial
business loans
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
144
|
-
|
144
|
|
Total
|
$
132
|
$1,288
|
$
13,207
|
$
25,829
|
$
19,653
|
$
8,394
|
$
5,107
|
$
229
|
-
|
$
73,839
|
The
following table describes the non-performing loans by the geographic location as
of March 31, 2010:
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Inland
Empire
|
Southern
California
(1)
|
Other
California
(2)
|
Other
States
|
Total
|
|
Mortgage
loans:
|
||||||
Single-family
|
$
17,526
|
$
37,332
|
$ 7,941
|
$
853
|
$
63,652
|
|
Multi-family
|
662
|
1,487
|
4,407
|
-
|
6,556
|
|
Commercial
real estate
|
1,224
|
1,571
|
-
|
-
|
2,795
|
|
Construction
|
342
|
350
|
-
|
-
|
692
|
|
Commercial
business loans
|
-
|
144
|
-
|
-
|
144
|
|
Total
|
$
19,754
|
$
40,884
|
$
12,348
|
$
853
|
$
73,839
|
(1)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire.
|
(2)
|
Other
than the Inland Empire and Southern
California.
|
For the
quarter ended March 31, 2010, 15 loans for $6.8 million were modified from their
original terms, were re-underwritten and were identified in the Corporation’s
asset quality reports as restructured loans. For the nine months
ended March 31, 2010, 102 loans for $47.7 million were modified from their
original terms, were re-underwritten and were identified in the Corporation’s
asset quality reports as restructured loans. As of March 31, 2010,
the outstanding balance of restructured loans was $60.4 million: 57
were classified as pass and remain on accrual status ($25.6 million); eight were
classified as special mention and remain on accrual status ($4.6 million); 81
were classified as substandard on non-accrual status ($30.2 million); and five
were classified as loss and fully reserved on non-accrual status.
The
Corporation upgrades restructured single-family loans to the pass category if
the borrower has demonstrated satisfactory contractual payments for at least six
to 12 consecutive months; and if the borrower has demonstrated satisfactory
contractual payments beyond 12 consecutive months, the loan is no longer
categorized as a restructured loan. In addition to the payment
history describe above, preferred loans must also demonstrate a combination of
the following characteristics to be upgraded, such as: satisfactory cash flow,
satisfactory guarantor support, and additional collateral support, among
others.
To
qualify for restructuring, a borrower must provide evidence of their
creditworthiness such as, current financial statements, their most recent income
tax returns, current paystubs, current W-2s, and most recent bank statements,
among other documents, which are then verified by the Bank. The Bank
re-underwrites the loan with the borrower’s updated financial information, new
credit report, current loan balance, new interest rate, remaining loan term,
updated property value and modified payment schedule, among other
considerations, to determine if the borrower qualifies.
Total
classified loans (including loans designated as special mention) were $93.5
million at March 31, 2010, a decrease of $6.2 million or six percent, from $99.7
million at June 30, 2009. The classified loans at March 31, 2010
consist of 40 loans in the special mention category (30 single-family loans of
$9.6 million, seven commercial real estate loans of $5.8 million, one
multi-family loan of $1.0 million, one land loan of $1.3 million and one
commercial business loan of $750,000) and 244 loans in the substandard category
(213 single-family loans of $64.2 million, seven multi-family loans of $6.6
million, six commercial real estate loans of $3.4 million, 11 construction loans
of $692,000 and seven commercial business loans of $144,000).
43
The
classified loans at June 30, 2009 consisted of 43 loans in the special mention
category (31 single-family loans of $12.4 million, five multi-family loans of
$7.8 million, five commercial real estate loans of $3.5 million, one land loan
of $480,000 and one commercial business loan of $144,000) and 240 loans in the
substandard category (205 single-family loans of $60.7 million, seven
multi-family loans of $5.8 million, eight commercial real estate loans of $3.4
million, 11 construction loans of $2.7 million, one land loan of $1.6 million
and eight commercial business loans of $1.2 million).
During
the quarter ended March 31, 2010, 45 real estate owned properties were acquired
in the settlement of loans, while 25 real estate owned properties were sold for
a $470,000 net gain. During the nine months ended March 31, 2010, 110
real estate owned properties were acquired in the settlement of loans, while 115
real estate owned properties were sold for a net gain of $2.0
million. As of March 31, 2010, real estate owned was comprised of 75
properties with a net fair value of $17.6 million (two from loan repurchases and
loans which could not be sold and 73 from loans held for investment), primarily
located in Southern California. This compares to 80 real estate owned
properties (three from loan repurchases and loans which could not be sold and 77
from loans held for investment), primarily located in Southern California, with
a net fair value of $16.4 million at June 30, 2009. A new appraisal
was obtained on each of the properties at the time of foreclosure and fair value
was calculated by using the lower of appraised value or the listing price of the
property, net of disposition costs. Any initial loss was recorded as
a charge to the allowance for loan losses before being transferred to real
estate owned. Subsequently, if there is further deterioration in real
estate values, specific real estate owned loss reserves are established and
charged to the statement of operations. In addition, the Corporation
reflects costs to carry real estate owned as real estate operating expenses as
incurred.
The
following table summarizes classified assets, which is comprised of classified
loans and real estate owned at the dates indicated:
At
March 31, 2010
|
At
June 30, 2009
|
||||||||
(Dollars
In Thousands)
|
Balance
|
Count
|
Balance
|
Count
|
|||||
Special
mention loans:
|
|||||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||
Single-family
|
$ 9,621
|
30
|
$ 12,356
|
31
|
|||||
Multi-family
|
1,054
|
1
|
7,835
|
5
|
|||||
Commercial
real estate
|
5,820
|
7
|
3,465
|
5
|
|||||
Other
|
1,292
|
1
|
480
|
1
|
|||||
Commercial
business loans
|
750
|
1
|
144
|
1
|
|||||
Total
special mention loans
|
18,537
|
40
|
24,280
|
43
|
|||||
Substandard
loans:
|
|||||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||
Single-family
|
64,164
|
213
|
60,730
|
205
|
|||||
Multi-family
|
6,556
|
7
|
5,772
|
7
|
|||||
Commercial
real estate
|
3,414
|
6
|
3,414
|
8
|
|||||
Construction
|
692
|
11
|
2,687
|
11
|
|||||
Other
|
-
|
-
|
1,565
|
1
|
|||||
Commercial
business loans
|
144
|
7
|
1,246
|
8
|
|||||
Total
substandard loans
|
74,970
|
244
|
75,414
|
240
|
|||||
Total
classified loans
|
93,507
|
284
|
99,694
|
283
|
|||||
Real
estate owned:
|
|||||||||
Single-family
|
15,285
|
52
|
15,167
|
63
|
|||||
Multi-family
|
715
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Commercial
real estate
|
1,094
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Other
|
461
|
17
|
1,272
|
17
|
|||||
Total
real estate owned
|
17,555
|
75
|
16,439
|
80
|
|||||
Total
classified assets
|
$
111,062
|
359
|
$
116,133
|
363
|
|||||
44
Loan
Volume Activities
The
following table is provided to disclose details related to the volume of loans
originated, purchased and sold (in thousands):
For
the Quarter
Ended
|
For
the Nine Months
Ended
|
||||||||||
March
31,
|
March
31,
|
||||||||||
2010
|
2009
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
Loans
originated for sale:
|
|||||||||||
Retail
originations
|
$ 101,002
|
$ 66,965
|
$ 304,410
|
$
166,792
|
|||||||
Wholesale
originations
|
258,247
|
299,419
|
1,011,389
|
534,252
|
|||||||
Total
loans originated for sale (1)
|
359,249
|
366,384
|
$
1,315,799
|
701,044
|
|||||||
Loans
sold:
|
|||||||||||
Servicing
released
|
(342,952
|
)
|
(300,398
|
)
|
(1,305,049
|
)
|
(616,560
|
)
|
|||
Servicing
retained
|
-
|
-
|
(1,492
|
)
|
(193
|
)
|
|||||
Total
loans sold (2)
|
(342,952
|
)
|
(300,398
|
)
|
(1,306,541
|
)
|
(616,753
|
)
|
|||
Loans
originated for investment:
|
|||||||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||||
Single-family
|
-
|
802
|
323
|
8,278
|
|||||||
Multi-family
|
515
|
1,750
|
515
|
6,250
|
|||||||
Commercial
real estate
|
-
|
-
|
1,300
|
2,073
|
|||||||
Construction
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
265
|
|||||||
Other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1,740
|
|||||||
Commercial
business loans
|
-
|
358
|
-
|
938
|
|||||||
Consumer
loans
|
18
|
-
|
124
|
531
|
|||||||
Total
loans originated for investment (3)
|
533
|
2,910
|
2,262
|
20,075
|
|||||||
Loans
purchased for investment:
|
|||||||||||
Mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||||
Single-family
|
-
|
595
|
-
|
595
|
|||||||
Total
loans purchased for investment
|
-
|
595
|
-
|
595
|
|||||||
Mortgage
loan principal payments
|
(28,073
|
)
|
(36,246
|
)
|
(98,975
|
)
|
(125,977
|
)
|
|||
Real
estate acquired in settlement of loans
|
(19,050
|
)
|
(15,485
|
)
|
(45,051
|
)
|
(41,636
|
)
|
|||
Increase
(decrease) in other items, net (4)
|
10,450
|
(145
|
)
|
9,746
|
(4,480
|
)
|
|||||
Net
(decrease) increase in loans held for
investment,
loans held for sale at fair value
|
|||||||||||
and
loans held for sale at lower cost or
market
|
$ (19,843
|
)
|
$ 17,615
|
$ (122,760
|
)
|
$ (67,132
|
)
|
(1)
|
Includes
PBM loans originated for sale during the quarters and nine months ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009 totaling $359.2 million, $366.3 million, $1.32
billion and $701.0 million,
respectively.
|
(2)
|
Includes
PBM loans sold during the quarters and nine months ended March 31, 2010
and 2009 totaling $342.9 million, $296.6 million, $1.31 billion and $613.0
million, respectively.
|
(3)
|
Includes
PBM loans originated for investment during the quarters and nine months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 totaling $0, $802, $223 and $8.8 million,
respectively.
|
(4)
|
Includes
net changes in undisbursed loan funds, deferred loan fees or costs,
allowance for loan losses and fair value of loans held for
sale.
|
45
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The
Corporation’s primary sources of funds are deposits, proceeds from the sale of
loans originated for sale, proceeds from principal and interest payments on
loans, proceeds from the maturity and sale of investment securities, FHLB – San
Francisco advances, and access to the discount window facility at the Federal
Reserve Bank of San Francisco. While maturities and scheduled
amortization of loans and investment securities are a relatively predictable
source of funds, deposit flows, mortgage prepayments and loan sales are greatly
influenced by general interest rates, economic conditions and
competition.
The
primary investing activity of the Bank is the origination and purchase of loans
held for investment. During the first nine months of fiscal 2010 and
2009, the Bank originated $1.32 billion and $721.1 million of loans,
respectively. The Bank did not purchase any loans from other
financial institutions in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 and only
purchased $595,000 in the same period of fiscal 2009. The total loans
sold in the first nine months of fiscal 2010 and 2009 were $1.31 billion and
$616.8 million, respectively. At March 31, 2010, the Bank had loan
origination commitments totaling $124.1 million and undisbursed loans in process
and lines of credit totaling $6.8 million. The Bank anticipates that
it will have sufficient funds available to meet its current loan
commitments.
The
Bank’s primary financing activity is gathering deposits. During the
first nine months of fiscal 2010, the net decrease in deposits was $41.3 million
in comparison to a net decrease in deposits of $64.5 million during the same
period in fiscal 2009. The decrease in deposits was consistent with
the Corporation’s short-term strategy to deleverage the balance sheet (refer to
“Executive Summary and Operating Strategy” on page 23). On March 31,
2010, time deposits that are scheduled to mature in one year or less were $358.2
million. Historically, the Bank has been able to retain a significant
amount of its time deposits as they mature by adjusting deposit rates to the
current interest rate environment.
The Bank
must maintain an adequate level of liquidity to ensure the availability of
sufficient funds to support loan growth and deposit withdrawals, to satisfy
financial commitments and to take advantage of investment
opportunities. The Bank generally maintains sufficient cash and cash
equivalents to meet short-term liquidity needs. At March 31, 2010,
total cash and cash equivalents were $86.0 million, or 6.12 percent of total
assets. Depending on market conditions and the pricing of
deposit products and FHLB – San Francisco advances, the Bank may continue to
rely on FHLB – San Francisco advances for part of its liquidity
needs. As of March 31, 2010, the financing availability at FHLB – San
Francisco was limited to 37 percent of total assets; the remaining borrowing
facility was $199.6 million and the remaining unused collateral was $293.5
million. In addition, the Bank has secured a $17.3 million discount
window facility at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, collateralized by
investment securities with a fair market value of $19.3 million. As
of March 31, 2010, there was no outstanding borrowing under this
facility.
In October 2008, the FDIC introduced the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (the “TLGP”), a program designed to improve the functioning of the credit markets and to strengthen capital in the financial system during this period of economic distress. The TLGP has two components: 1) a debt guarantee program, guaranteeing certain newly issued senior unsecured debt, and 2) a transaction account guarantee program, providing a full guarantee of non-interest bearing deposit transaction accounts, Negotiable Order of Withdrawal (or “NOW”) accounts paying a minimal or no annual interest, and Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts, regardless of the amount. The Bank has not issued any debt under this program and our ability to participate in the debt guarantee program expired April 30, 2010. The Bank is presently participating in the transaction account guarantee program, which has been extended through the period ending December 31, 2010. If by October 29, 2010, the FDIC finds that a further extension is warranted, the transaction account guarantee program will remain in effect through December 31, 2011. The annualized program fees are 15 basis points on transaction account balances over $250,000 for institutions assigned to Risk Category I for deposit insurance purposes (or 20 basis points for those in Risk Category II and 25 basis points for those in Risk Categories III and IV).
Although
the OTS eliminated the minimum liquidity requirement for savings institutions in
April 2002, the regulation still requires thrifts to maintain adequate liquidity
to assure safe and sound operations. The Bank’s average liquidity ratio (defined
as the ratio of average qualifying liquid assets to average deposits and
borrowings) for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 increased to 26.1 percent from
20.7 percent during the quarter ended June 30, 2009. The relatively
high level of liquidity is consistent with the Corporation’s strategy to
mitigate liquidity risk during this period of economic uncertainty.
46
The Bank
is required to maintain specific amounts of capital pursuant to OTS
requirements. Under the OTS prompt corrective action provisions, a
minimum ratio of 1.5 percent for Tangible Capital is required to be deemed other
than “critically undercapitalized,” while a minimum of 5.0 percent for Core
Capital, 10.0 percent for Total Risk-Based Capital and 6.0 percent for Tier 1
Risk-Based Capital is required to be deemed “well capitalized.” As of
March 31, 2010, the Bank exceeded all regulatory capital requirements to be
deemed “well capitalized.” The Bank’s actual and required capital
amounts and ratios as of March 31, 2010 are as follows (dollars in
thousands):
Amount
|
Percent
|
||
Tangible
capital
|
$
119,875
|
8.53%
|
|
Requirement
|
28,095
|
2.00
|
|
Excess
over requirement
|
$ 91,780
|
6.53%
|
|
Core
capital
|
$
119,875
|
8.53%
|
|
Requirement
to be “Well Capitalized”
|
70,238
|
5.00
|
|
Excess
over requirement
|
$ 49,637
|
3.53%
|
|
Total
risk-based capital
|
$
127,306
|
15.53%
|
|
Requirement
to be “Well Capitalized”
|
81,985
|
10.00
|
|
Excess
over requirement
|
$ 45,321
|
5.53%
|
|
Tier
1 risk-based capital
|
$
116,856
|
14.25%
|
|
Requirement
to be “Well Capitalized”
|
49,191
|
6.00
|
|
Excess
over requirement
|
$ 67,665
|
8.25%
|
The
ability of the Corporation to pay dividends to stockholders depends primarily on
the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to the Corporation. The Bank
may not declare or pay a cash dividend if the effect thereof would cause its net
worth to be reduced below the regulatory capital requirements imposed by federal
and state regulation. The Corporation paid $238,000 of cash dividends
to its shareholders in the first nine months of fiscal 2010.
In
December 2009, the Corporation raised $12.0 million of capital through a public
offering of common stock, issuing 5.18 million shares of common stock at $2.50
per share, less underwriting fees and other costs. The proceeds
strengthened the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios as a result of the
Corporation’s $12.0 million capital contribution to the Bank in December
2009.
Commitments
and Derivative Financial Instruments
The
Corporation is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in
the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its
customers. These financial instruments include commitments to extend
credit, in the form of originating loans or providing funds under existing lines
of credit, and mandatory loan sale agreements to third parties. These
instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest-rate
risk in excess of the amount recognized in the accompanying condensed
consolidated statements of financial condition. The Corporation’s
exposure to credit loss, in the event of non-performance by the counterparty to
these financial instruments, is represented by the contractual amount of these
instruments. The Corporation uses the same credit policies in
entering into financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk as it does for
on-balance sheet instruments. For a discussion on commitments and
derivative financial instruments, see Note 5 of the Notes to Unaudited Interim
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements on page 12.
47
Supplemental
Information
At
|
At
|
At
|
|||
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
March
31,
|
|||
2010
|
2009
|
2009
|
|||
Loans
serviced for others (in thousands)
|
$
140,462
|
$
156,025
|
$
166,939
|
||
Book
value per share
|
$
10.90
|
$
18.48
|
$ 18.68
|
ITEM
3 – Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.
The
Corporation’s principal financial objective is to achieve long-term
profitability while reducing its exposure to fluctuating interest
rates. The Corporation has sought to reduce the exposure of its
earnings to changes in interest rates by attempting to manage the repricing
mismatch between interest-earning assets and interest-bearing
liabilities. The principal element in achieving this objective is to
increase the interest-rate sensitivity of the Corporation’s interest-earning
assets by retaining for its portfolio new loan originations with interest rates
subject to periodic adjustment to market conditions and by selling fixed-rate,
single-family mortgage loans. In addition, the Corporation maintains
an investment portfolio, which is largely in U.S. government agency MBS and U.S.
government sponsored enterprise MBS with contractual maturities of up to 30
years that reprice frequently. The Corporation relies on retail
deposits as its primary source of funds while utilizing FHLB – San Francisco
advances as a secondary source of funding. Management believes retail
deposits, unlike brokered deposits, reduce the effects of interest rate
fluctuations because they generally represent a more stable source of
funds. As part of its interest rate risk management strategy, the
Corporation promotes transaction accounts and time deposits with terms up to
five years.
Through
the use of an internal interest rate risk model and the OTS interest rate risk
model, the Bank is able to analyze its interest rate risk exposure by measuring
the change in net portfolio value (“NPV”) over a variety of interest rate
scenarios. NPV is defined as the net present value of expected future
cash flows from assets, liabilities and off-balance sheet
contracts. The calculation is intended to illustrate the change in
NPV that would occur in the event of an immediate change in interest rates of
-100, +100, +200 and +300 basis points (“bp”) with no effect given to steps that
management might take to counter the effect of the interest rate
movement. The results of the
internal interest rate risk model are reconciled with the results provided by
the OTS on a quarterly basis. Significant deviations are researched
and adjusted where applicable.
The
following table is derived from the OTS interest rate risk model and represents
the NPV based on the indicated changes in interest rates as of March 31, 2010
(dollars in thousands).
NPV
as Percentage
|
|||||||||||||
Net
|
NPV
|
Portfolio
|
of
Portfolio Value
|
Sensitivity
|
|||||||||
Basis
Points ("bp")
|
Portfolio
|
Change
|
Value
of
|
Assets
|
Measure
|
||||||||
Change
in Rates
|
Value
|
(1)
|
Assets
|
(2) |
(3)
|
||||||||
+300
bp
|
$
129,276
|
$
(27,695
|
)
|
$
1,401,749
|
9.22%
|
-158
bp
|
|||||||
+200
bp
|
$
145,617
|
$
(11,354
|
)
|
$
1,425,541
|
10.21%
|
-58
bp
|
|||||||
+100
bp
|
$
155,662
|
$ (1,309
|
)
|
$
1,443,457
|
10.78%
|
-2
bp
|
|||||||
0
bp
|
$
156,971
|
$ -
|
$
1,453,503
|
10.80%
|
-
|
||||||||
-100
bp
|
$
153,336
|
$ (3,635
|
)
|
$
1,460,945
|
10.50%
|
-30
bp
|
|||||||
(1)
|
Represents
the decrease of the NPV at the indicated interest rate change in
comparison to the NPV at March 31, 2010 (“base
case”).
|
(2)
|
Calculated
as the NPV divided by the portfolio value of total
assets.
|
(3)
|
Calculated
as the change in the NPV ratio from the base case amount assuming the
indicated change in interest rates (expressed in basis
points).
|
48
The
following table is derived from the OTS interest rate risk model, the OTS
interest rate risk regulatory guidelines, and represents the change in the NPV
at a +200 basis point rate shock at March 31, 2010 and a -100 basis point rate
shock at June 30, 2009.
At
March 31, 2010
|
At
June 30, 2009
|
|||||||
(+200
bp rate shock)
|
(-100 bp rate shock)
|
|||||||
Pre-Shock
NPV ratio: NPV as a % of PV Assets
|
10.80
|
%
|
7.28
|
%
|
||||
Post-Shock
NPV ratio: NPV as a % of PV Assets
|
10.21
|
%
|
6.91
|
%
|
||||
Sensitivity
Measure: Change in NPV Ratio
|
58
|
bp
|
37
|
bp
|
||||
TB
13a Level of Risk
|
Minimal
|
Minimal
|
As with
any method of measuring interest rate risk, certain shortcomings are inherent in
the method of analysis presented in the foregoing tables. For
example, although certain assets and liabilities may have similar maturities or
periods to repricing, they may react in different degrees to changes in market
interest rates. Also, the interest rates on certain types of assets
and liabilities may fluctuate in advance of changes in market interest rates,
while interest rates on other types of assets and liabilities may lag behind
changes in market interest rates. Additionally, certain assets, such
as adjustable rate mortgage (“ARM”) loans, have features that restrict changes
in interest rates on a short-term basis and over the life of the
asset. Further, in the event of a change in interest rates, expected
rates of prepayments on loans and early withdrawals from time deposits could
likely deviate significantly from those assumed when calculating the results
described in the tables above. It is also possible that, as a result
of an interest rate increase, the higher mortgage payments required from ARM
borrowers could result in an increase in delinquencies and
defaults. Changes in market interest rates may also affect the volume
and profitability of the Corporation’s mortgage banking
operations. Accordingly, the data presented in the tables in this
section should not be relied upon as indicative of actual results in the event
of changes in interest rates. Furthermore, the NPV presented in the
foregoing tables is not intended to present the fair market value of the Bank,
nor does it represent amounts that would be available for distribution to
shareholders in the event of the liquidation of the Corporation.
The Bank
also models the sensitivity of net interest income for the 12-month period
subsequent to any given month-end assuming a dynamic balance sheet (accounting
for the Bank’s current balance sheet, 12-month business plan, embedded options,
rate floors, periodic caps, lifetime caps, and loan, investment, deposit and
borrowing cash flows, among others), and immediate, permanent and parallel
movements in interest rates of plus 200, plus 100 and minus 100 basis
points. The following table describes the results of the analysis at
March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2009.
At
March 31, 2010
|
At
June 30, 2009
|
|||||
Basis
Point (bp)
|
Change
in
|
Basis
Point (bp)
|
Change
in
|
|||
Change
in Rates
|
Net
Interest Income
|
Change
in Rates
|
Net
Interest Income
|
|||
+200
bp
|
+22.14%
|
+200
bp
|
+20.03%
|
|||
+100
bp
|
+12.46%
|
+100
bp
|
+18.28%
|
|||
-100
bp
|
-20.83%
|
-100
bp
|
+2.60%
|
At March
31, 2010 the Bank was asset sensitive as its interest-earning assets are
expected to reprice more quickly than its interest-bearing liabilities during
the subsequent 12-month period. Therefore, in a rising interest rate
environment, the model projects an increase in net interest income over the
subsequent 12-month period. In a falling interest rate environment,
the results project a decrease in net interest income over the subsequent
12-month period. At June 30, 2009, the Bank was also asset sensitive,
as its interest-earning assets are expected to reprice more quickly during the
subsequent 12-month period than its interest-bearing
liabilities. Therefore, in a rising interest rate environment, the
model also projects an increase in net interest income over the subsequent
12-month period. In a falling interest rate environment, the results
also project a slight increase in net interest income over the subsequent
12-month period.
Management
believes that the assumptions used to complete the analysis described in the
table above are reasonable. However, past experience has shown that
immediate, permanent and parallel movements in interest rates will not
necessarily occur. Additionally, while the analysis provides a tool
to evaluate the projected net interest income to changes in interest rates,
actual results may be substantially different if actual experience differs from
the assumptions used to complete the analysis, particularly with respect to the
12-month business plan when asset growth is forecast. Therefore, the
model results that the Corporation discloses should be thought of as a risk
management tool to compare the trends of the Corporation’s current disclosure to
previous disclosures, over time, within the context of the actual performance of
the treasury yield curve.
49
ITEM
4 – Controls and Procedures.
a) An
evaluation of the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedure (as defined in
Section 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
“Act”)) was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of the
Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and the
Corporation’s Disclosure Committee as of the end of the period covered by this
quarterly report. In designing and evaluating the Corporation’s
disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that disclosure
controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide
only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the disclosure
controls and procedures are met. Additionally, in designing
disclosure controls and procedures, management necessarily was required to apply
its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible disclosure
controls and procedures. The design of any disclosure controls and procedures
also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future
events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving
its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Based on
their evaluation, the Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer concluded that the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures as
of March 31, 2010 are effective, at the reasonable assurance level, in ensuring
that the information required to be disclosed by the Corporation in the reports
it files or submits under the Act is (i) accumulated and communicated to the
Corporation’s management (including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer) in a timely manner, and (ii) recorded, processed, summarized
and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and
forms.
b) There
have been no changes in the Corporation’s internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Act) that occurred during the
quarter ended March 31, 2010, that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the Corporation’s internal control over financial
reporting. The Corporation does not expect that its internal control
over financial reporting will prevent all error and all fraud. A
control procedure, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only
reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control procedure
are met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control
procedures, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all
control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Corporation have been
detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that
judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur
because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be
circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more
people, or by management override of the control. The design of any
control procedure also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the
likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions;
over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or
the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective
control procedure, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be
detected.
PART II – OTHER
INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings.
From time
to time, the Corporation or its subsidiaries are engaged in legal proceedings in
the ordinary course of business, none of which are currently considered to have
a material impact on the Corporation’s financial position or results of
operations.
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
There
have been no material changes in the risk factors previously disclosed in Part
I, Item IA of our Annual Report of Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2009,
except as set forth in our Form 10-Q for the quarters ended September 30, 2009
and December 31, 2009.
We are
subject to various regulatory requirements, expect to be subject to an
enforcement action and may be subject to future additional regulatory
restrictions and enforcement actions.
In light of the current challenging operating environment, along
with our elevated level of non-performing assets, delinquencies, and adversely
classified assets, we are subject to increased regulatory scrutiny and
additional
50
regulatory
restrictions, and may become subject to potential enforcement
actions. Such enforcement actions could place limitations on our
business and adversely affect our ability to implement our business
plans. Even though the Bank remains well-capitalized, the regulatory
agencies have the authority to restrict our operations to those consistent with
adequately capitalized institutions. For example, if the regulatory
agencies were to impose such a restriction, we would likely have limitations on
our lending activities. The regulatory agencies also have the power
to limit the rates paid by the Bank to attract retail deposits in its local
markets. We also may be required to reduce our levels of
non-performing assets within specified time frames. These time frames
might not necessarily result in maximizing the price that might otherwise be
received for the underlying properties. In addition, if such
restrictions were also imposed upon other institutions that operate in the
Bank’s markets, multiple institutions disposing of properties at the same time
could further diminish the potential proceeds received from the sale of these
properties. If any of these or other additional restrictions are
placed on us, it would limit the resources currently available to us as a
well-capitalized institution.
Along
with our level of certain non traditional loans including stated income and
interest only loans, non-performing assets, delinquencies, and
adversely classified assets, we are subject to increased regulatory scrutiny as
well as increased FDIC premiums as a result of the potential risk of loss in our
loan portfolio. Following the regulators’ most recent examination of
the Bank, we and the Bank expect to become subject to an enforcement action with
the OTS. This action, as well as any other future corrective action
we may become subject to, could require us to limit our lending activities and
reduce our levels of non-traditional loans and classified or non-performing
assets within specified timeframes which might not necessarily result in
maximizing the price which might otherwise be received for the underlying
properties. In addition, this action, as well as any other future
corrective action, could require us to, among other things; increase our
allowance for loan losses and dispose of certain assets and liabilities within a
prescribed period of time.
In
addition, in July 2009, the OTS has notified both Provident and the Bank that
each had been designated to be in “troubled condition.” As a result of that
designation, neither Provident nor the Bank may appoint any new director or
senior executive officer or change the responsibilities of any current senior
executive officers without notifying the OTS. In addition, neither party may
make indemnification and severance payments or enter into other forms of
compensation agreements with any of their respective directors or officers
without the prior written approval of the OTS. Dividend payments by Provident
require the prior written non-objection of the OTS regional Director and
dividend payments by the Bank requires the Bank to submit an application to the
OTS and receive OTS approval before a dividend payment can be made. The Bank is
also subject to restrictions on asset growth. These restrictions
require the Bank to limit its asset growth in any quarter to an amount not to
exceed net interest credited on deposit liabilities, excluding permitted growth
as a result of cash capital contributions from Provident. Also, the Bank may
also not enter into any third party contracts outside of the ordinary course of
business without regulatory approval. In addition, the Bank may not
accept, renew or roll over any brokered deposit. The Bank, however,
has not relied upon brokered deposits as a significant source of funds and at
March 31, 2010 the Bank had only $19.6 million of brokered
deposits.
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds.
During
the quarter ended March 31, 2010, the Corporation did not purchase any equity
securities and did not sell any securities that were not registered under the
Securities Act of 1933.
Item
3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities.
Not
applicable.
51
Item
4. (Removed and Reserved).
Not
applicable.
Item
5. Other Information.
Not
applicable.
Item
6. Exhibits.
Exhibits:
3.1
|
Certificate
of Incorporation of Provident Financial Holdings, Inc. (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Corporation’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1 (File No. 333-02230))
|
|
3.2
|
Bylaws
of Provident Financial Holdings, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.2 to the Corporation’s Form 8-K dated October 25,
2007).
|
|
10.1 |
Employment
Agreement with Craig G. Blunden (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Corporation’s Form 8-K dated December 19, 2005)
|
|
10.2 | Post-Retirement Compensation Agreement with Craig G. Blunden (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Corporation’s Form 8-K dated December 19, 2005) | |
10.3 |
1996
Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to the
Corporation’s proxy statement dated December 12, 1996)
|
|
10.4 | 1996 Management Recognition Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit B to the Corporation’s proxy statement dated December 12, 1996) | |
10.5 |
Severance
Agreement with Richard L. Gale, Kathryn R. Gonzales, Lilian
Salter, Donavon P. Ternes and David S. Weiant (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 in the Corporation’s Form 8-K dated July 3,
2006)
|
|
10.6 |
2003
Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to the
Corporation’s proxy statement dated October 21, 2003)
|
|
10.7 |
Form
of Incentive Stock Option Agreement for options granted under the 2003
Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the
Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30,
2005)
|
|
10.8 | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement for options granted under the 2003 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2005) | |
10.9 | 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to the Corporation’s proxy statement dated October 12, 2006) | |
10.10 | Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement for options granted under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 in the Corporation’s Form 10-Q ended March 31, 2006) | |
10.11 | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement for options granted under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 in the Corporation’s Form 10-Q ended March 31, 2006) | |
10.12 | Form of Restricted Stock Agreement for restricted shares awarded under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 in the Corporation’s Form 10-Q ended March 31, 2006) |
52
10.13 | Post-Retirement Compensation Agreement with Donavon P. Ternes (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Corporation’s Form 8-K dated July 10, 2009) | |
14
|
Code
of Ethics for the Corporation’s directors, officers and employees
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 14 in the Corporation’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2008)
|
|
31.1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
31.2 |
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
|
32.1 |
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
|
32.2 | Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
53
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.
Provident Financial Holdings, Inc. | |
May 10, 2010 | /s/ Craig. G. Blunden |
Craig G. Blunden | |
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer | |
(Principal Executive Officer) | |
May 10, 2010 | /s/ Donavon P. Ternes |
Donavon P. Ternes | |
Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer | |
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
54
Exhibit
Index
31.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
32.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
32.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|