Freddie Mac 2014 Annual Report Download - page 259

254 Freddie Mac
evaluated by comparing the scope and breadth of his responsibilities with those of other executive-level positions at the
company.
The Compensation Committee’s 2014 Target TDC recommendation for each of the NEOs other than Mr. Layton was
reviewed and approved by FHFA. The following table sets forth the components of 2014 Target TDC for each of our NEOs
and the percentage change, if any, compared to 2013 Target TDC.
Table 65 — 2014 Target TDC
2014 Target TDC
Named Executive Officer Base Salary
Fixed
Deferred
Salary
At-Risk
Deferred
Salary Target TDC
Percent
Change v.
Prior Year
Donald H. Layton $ 600,000 $ — $ — $ 600,000 0%
James G. Mackey 500,000 1,600,000 900,000 3,000,000 0%
David B. Lowman 500,000 1,600,000 900,000 3,000,000 0%
William H. McDavid 500,000 1,320,000 780,000 2,600,000 0%
Jerry Weiss 500,000 900,000 600,000 2,000,000 1%
Determination of Actual 2014 Compensation
The Compensation Committee and FHFA considered our achievements in pursuing our primary business objectives, as
well as other factors, in determining the funding levels for the following elements of compensation in 2014.
At-Risk Deferred Salary Based on Conservatorship Scorecard Performance
Half of each NEO's 2014 At-Risk Deferred Salary, or 15% of Target TDC, was subject to reduction based on FHFA's
assessment of the company's performance against the objectives in the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard. FHFA independently
assessed the company’s performance against the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard and determined that a 100% funding level
was justified for this portion of At-Risk Deferred Salary. FHFA noted the following considerations in assessing our
performance against the Conservatorship Scorecard:
• 2014 was a year of review and reevaluation of priorities, as well as a year of transition for both FHFA and Freddie
Mac, in part because of new leadership at FHFA, and as a result, the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard was not
finalized until May; and,
• Freddie Mac met all the goals specified in the Maintain, Reduce and Build components of the Scorecard, and exceeded
the goals in the areas of risk transfers and retained portfolio sales.
In making its assessment, FHFA also took into consideration the following:
• The extent to which the initiatives were undertaken in a safe and sound manner;
• The quality, thoroughness, creativity, effectiveness, and timeliness of our work products;
• Cooperation and collaboration with FHFA, Fannie Mae, CSS, and the industry;
• The extent to which the outcomes of our activities supported a competitive and resilient secondary mortgage market to
support homeowners and renters; and
• The quality of the input provided by us to FHFA for periodic progress reports to the public.
The table below presents the Conservatorship Scorecard objectives and FHFA's assessment of our achievement against
those objectives.
Table 66 — Achievement of Conservatorship Scorecard Performance Measures
Performance Goals FHFA's Summary of Performance
1Maintain in a safe and sound manner, foreclosure prevention activities and credit availability for new and refinanced mortgages
to foster liquid, efficient, competitive and resilient national housing finance markets (40%)
Work to increase access to mortgage credit to creditworthy borrowers, consistent
with the full extent of applicable credit requirements and risk management
practices through:
All goals were achieved
• Continuing to improve the Representations and Warranties Framework for
originations;
• Providing additional clarity regarding servicing Representations and Warranties
and remedies for poor performance, including compensatory fees;
• Providing transparency regarding servicer eligibility standards;
• Assessing and developing plans to encourage greater participation by small
lenders, rural lenders, and state and local Housing Finance Agencies.
Continue to undertake key loss mitigation and foreclosure prevention activities,
including: All goals were achieved
Table of Contents