This public-data screen identifies active U.S. banks between $1 billion and $50 billion in assets where domestic offices declined while total deposits increased from December 31, 2024 to December 31, 2025. The included banks are Intercredit Bank, N.A., First PREMIER Bank, Forbright Bank, First Capital Bank, Macatawa Bank, N.A., Dacotah Bank, Tompkins Community Bank, and Community Bank, N.A. The main conclusion is narrow: deposits up and offices down can signal better branch efficiency, but only after deposit cost, deposit mix, and credit quality support the story.
This is written for bank credit analysts reviewing a branch-efficiency story. Fintech founders, financial journalists, and small-bank directors can still use the screen, but the core question is the credit-memo question: when deposits rise while branches fall, what diligence separates franchise efficiency from funding risk?
Screen values are presented from December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 public bank data in Banking Intelligence bank data. Assets and deposits should be tied back to Call Report source files, while institution identity and branch context should be checked against public FDIC and Federal Reserve records.[2][3][5]
As of April 24, 2026, the schedules, thresholds, and guidance referenced below are summarized from public FFIEC, FDIC, OCC, and Federal Reserve sources. Verify the latest filings and enforcement updates before citing this screen in a credit memo or investor document.
Methodology
The screen starts with banks that public institution data showed as active at the 2025 period end. It keeps U.S. banks with 2025 total assets from $1 billion to $50 billion, a lower domestic-office count in 2025 than 2024, and higher total deposits in 2025 than 2024. Domestic offices means the main office plus domestic branch offices in public institution and location data; foreign offices are excluded.
Total deposits per office equals December 31, 2025 total deposits divided by 2025 domestic offices. It is not branch-level domestic deposits. Merger, branch-sale, and charter-change cases are handled conservatively: the screen follows the surviving bank identity and does not make pro forma transaction adjustments. If an office reduction appears transaction-driven, treat it as acquisition cleanup before calling it organic branch efficiency.
Key takeaways
- A one-office reduction can be material when the base is small: Intercredit Bank, N.A. moved from 5 offices to 4, so the office count fell 20% while deposits rose 48.8% in the screen.
- Deposits per office is most useful as a prompt, not a verdict. Forbright Bank shows $2.27 billion of total deposits per 2025 domestic office, which means the next question is deposit source, not branch productivity alone.
- For banks with program, brokered, or fintech-related deposits, separate relationship deposits from funding channels. The June 2023 Interagency Guidance on Third-Party Relationships makes clear that third-party use does not remove the bank’s responsibility for safe and sound operation.[1]
- Before calling the pattern positive, check whether deposit cost, uninsured deposits, brokered deposits, loan growth, and asset quality moved in the same direction. The compact filing map below keeps those checks in one place.
The screen
The table is not a ranking of best banks. It is a public-data screen that finds an unusual pattern and makes it reviewable. The Call Report source files can be pulled from the FFIEC Central Data Repository, and institution identity or branch-location context can be checked through FDIC BankFind, the FDIC BankFind Suite API documentation, and the Federal Reserve’s National Information Center.[2][3][4][5]
| Bank | State | 2025 assets | Offices 2024 | Offices 2025 | Deposit growth | Total deposits / 2025 domestic office | Likely review angle |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercredit Bank, N.A. | FL | $1.6B | 5 | 4 | 48.8% | $347.5M | Small-base consolidation and retention check |
| First PREMIER Bank | SD | $4.2B | 14 | 13 | 21.5% | $266.3M | One-office decline; price the growth |
| Forbright Bank | MD | $7.9B | 5 | 3 | 20.7% | $2.27B | Funding-model concentration review |
| First Capital Bank | SC | $1.1B | 5 | 4 | 19.6% | $235.4M | Small-base consolidation and market check |
| Macatawa Bank, N.A. | MI | $3.7B | 29 | 28 | 11.8% | $109.3M | Modest consolidation; local share check |
| Dacotah Bank | SD | $4.8B | 34 | 33 | 9.7% | $130.9M | Rural network retention check |
| Tompkins Community Bank | NY | $8.7B | 60 | 59 | 9.6% | $120.9M | Large-network retention check |
| Community Bank, N.A. | NY | $17.0B | 207 | 203 | 6.6% | $71.7M | Scale efficiency and branch-market trend |
Source note: screen values are presented from the public bank-data screen using December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 public bank data. Filing map for memo work: balance sheet and assets in Schedule RC; deposit detail in RC-E; deposit-insurance and uninsured-deposit context in RC-O; income and interest expense in RI; average balances in RC-K; loans and credit quality in RC-C, RC-N, RI-B, and RI-C; capital in RC-R.
Worked example: two very different branch stories
- Intercredit Bank, N.A. shows 4 offices and $347.5 million of deposits per office. That implies roughly $1.39 billion of deposits in the screen year. With 48.8% deposit growth, the prior-year deposit base was roughly $934 million, or about $187 million per office across 5 offices.
- Forbright Bank shows 3 offices and $2.27 billion of deposits per office. That implies roughly $6.81 billion of deposits in the screen year. With 20.7% deposit growth, the prior-year deposit base was roughly $5.64 billion, or about $1.13 billion per office across 5 offices.
- The decision rule is different for each bank. Intercredit’s change can be reviewed as branch consolidation plus deposit retention. Forbright’s change should be reviewed first as a funding-model question because a $2.27 billion deposits-per-office figure is too large to explain with ordinary teller-line activity alone.
What the signal can mean
The same screen can capture several business models. A community bank with 200 offices and $71.7 million of deposits per office, like Community Bank, N.A. in the table, should be read differently from a bank with 3 offices and more than $2 billion per office. The numerator is total deposits; the denominator is domestic offices; neither number tells you whether the deposits are local, operating, brokered, fintech-program, municipal, commercial, or rate-driven.
- Branch consolidation with customer retention: if offices fall by 1 or 2 locations and deposits per office rises modestly, the bank may be closing weaker locations while customers stay. Confirm with FDIC Summary of Deposits market data, the annual June 30 branch-office survey described by the FDIC Summary of Deposits page.[6]
- Commercial operating deposits: a bank can support large balances with few offices if treasury-management, escrow, title, homeowner-association, or commercial operating accounts drive balances. Check deposit mix and uninsured-deposit context before giving credit for branch productivity.
- Specialty, brokered, or program funding: deposit growth may not be branch-driven at all. A program-deposit bank belongs in a funding-model review, not a branch-productivity review. Use third-party guidance and bank-specific enforcement searches only where they affect the bank being reviewed.[1][8][9][10]
- Acquisition cleanup: after a merger, overlapping offices can close while deposits remain. Use FDIC BankFind history, NIC relationships, and public merger filings before treating office reduction as organic efficiency.[3][5]
- Rate-sensitive deposit growth: if deposits rise because the bank paid more for them, the branch story is weaker. Use interest expense on deposits and average interest-bearing deposits to estimate deposit cost across periods.
The funding-model angle matters even in a branch-efficiency review. A bank can look efficient on deposits per office and still be a weak credit story if the growth depends on a narrow channel, weak controls, or a regulator-imposed restriction on new relationships. The point is not to exclude banks with non-branch deposit engines. It is to identify which deposit engine you are actually underwriting.
How to review branch efficiency
Use the screen as the first 15 minutes of diligence, then move into schedules and supervisory context. In the bank profile search, start with the individual bank profile, then use the public-source trail below before comparing peers or writing a memo.
- Confirm identity: match the institution name through FDIC BankFind or NIC so you are not mixing a bank, a holding company, and a similarly named affiliate.[3][5]
- Rebuild the screen: pull the relevant Call Report periods from the FFIEC CDR and tie assets, deposits, and office context back to public filing and institution records.[2]
- Price the growth: calculate deposit cost using interest expense on deposits divided by average interest-bearing deposits. Deposit growth with a sharply higher cost is funding expansion, not clean branch efficiency.
- Check deposit stability: review deposit detail for noninterest-bearing, time, and brokered deposit movement, then review uninsured-deposit context. A bank with strong deposit growth and rising uninsured or brokered exposure deserves a liquidity question.
- Check the asset side: compare loan growth with past-due and nonaccrual loans, charge-offs and recoveries, and allowance trends. Faster deposits are less useful if they fund weaker credit.
- Run the CRE overlay: the December 2006 Interagency CRE Concentration Guidance flags institutions for further supervisory analysis when construction, land development, and other land loans are 100% or more of total capital, or when total CRE loans are 300% or more of total capital and CRE loans grew 50% or more during the prior 36 months. Use loan-category and capital schedules for the calculation.[7]
- Check enforcement history: search the FDIC, OCC, and Federal Reserve enforcement-action pages. A clean branch-efficiency story changes if an active order limits growth, requires capital planning, or restricts new third-party relationships.[8][9][10]
| Diligence question | Green-light pattern | Escalation pattern | Public source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did deposits grow without buying balances? | Deposits rose while estimated deposit cost stayed flat or fell. | Deposit cost rose faster than deposit balances. | Income and average-balance schedules |
| Did branch consolidation retain local franchise value? | Deposits per office rose and market presence stayed intact. | Deposits rose but local branch deposits or market share weakened. | FDIC Summary of Deposits and FDIC location data |
| Is the funding source narrow? | Deposit growth is spread across customer types and markets. | Growth depends on brokered, uninsured, municipal, fintech-program, or a few large commercial accounts. | Deposit-detail and uninsured-deposit schedules |
| Did the bank add credit risk while deposits grew? | Loan growth is controlled and credit-quality metrics are stable. | Loan growth accelerates while past-due, charge-off, or allowance indicators deteriorate. | Loan and credit-quality schedules |
| Does CRE concentration change the answer? | CRE exposure is below the 2006 interagency review triggers or supported by clear mitigants. | Construction and land development loans reach 100% of capital, or total CRE reaches 300% of capital with 50% growth over 36 months. | Interagency CRE Concentration Guidance, loan schedules, and capital schedules |
For peer work, compare the bank against institutions with similar asset size, charter type, geography, and business model. A $4 billion rural bank with 30 offices should not be judged by the same deposits-per-office benchmark as a specialty commercial bank with 3 offices. Use the peer comparison tool for the peer view, then use the public bank data view to keep the filing context visible.
The practical takeaway
Treat deposits up, branches down as a useful screen only when three checks pass: deposit cost did not weaken the story, deposit mix did not become narrow or unstable, and credit risk did not rise faster than funding. If one of those checks fails, label the pattern needs funding-source review, not branch efficiency.
For a credit analyst, that means tying the deposit story to the filing map above before writing a positive efficiency conclusion. For a board member, it means branch closures should be approved only with a deposit-retention report, a market-share check, and a funding-cost comparison. For sponsor-bank diligence, it means asking whether the bank can support program growth without adding concentration, reconciliation, or supervisory risk.
FAQ
Is a shrinking branch network bad for a bank?
No. It can be positive when deposits stay, service levels hold, and funding cost does not rise. The public-data test is to compare office count with deposit levels, deposit cost, and FDIC branch-market context.
What does deposits per office measure?
It measures total deposits divided by domestic offices. It is a useful efficiency proxy, but a very high figure, such as Forbright Bank’s $2.27 billion per office in this screen, should push the analyst to review deposit source and concentration.
Which Call Report schedules matter most for this screen?
Start with Schedule RC for the balance sheet and RC-E for deposit detail. Then use RC-O for uninsured-deposit context, RI and RC-K for deposit cost, the loan and credit-quality schedules for asset-side checks, and RC-R when CRE concentration or capital is part of the answer.
Why do enforcement searches belong in a branch-efficiency review?
Because a bank can show attractive public-data ratios while operating under restrictions that affect growth, partnerships, compliance, or capital planning. Search FDIC, OCC, and Federal Reserve enforcement pages before relying on the screen in a credit memo, sponsor-bank shortlist, or article.
Sources
- FDIC, Interagency Guidance on Third-Party Relationships: Risk Management: https://www.fdic.gov/news/financial-institution-letters/2023/fil23029.html
- FFIEC Central Data Repository, Call Report source files: https://cdr.ffiec.gov/public/
- FDIC BankFind, institution identity and branch context: https://banks.data.fdic.gov/bankfind-suite/bankfind
- FDIC BankFind Suite API documentation: https://api.fdic.gov/banks/docs
- Federal Reserve National Information Center: https://www.ffiec.gov/NPW
- FDIC Summary of Deposits, branch-office survey and market data: https://www.fdic.gov/sod
- Federal Reserve, Interagency CRE Concentration Guidance: https://www.federalreserve.gov/frrs/guidance/interagency-guidance-on-concentrations-in-commercial-real-estate-lending-sound-risk-management-practices.htm
- FDIC enforcement decisions and orders database: https://orders.fdic.gov/
- OCC enforcement actions page: https://www.occ.gov/topics/laws-and-regulations/enforcement-actions/
- Federal Reserve enforcement actions page: https://www.federalreserve.gov/supervisionreg/enforcementactions.htm