Independent Feasibility Study Consultants

SBA · USDA · EB-5 · Conventional · Since 1998
1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach CA 92651
111 Town Square Pl Ste 1238 PMB 657834, Jersey City, NJ 07310
539 W. Commerce St #8486, Dallas, TX 75208
Donald Safranek, MSc  ·  President
+1 310-857-2443 ext. 800  ·  email  ·  email
Fiduciary: Lender & Agency  ·  Independence Non-Negotiable
Fiduciary DeclarationFiduciary duty runs exclusively to the lender and agency — not to the borrower. Determinations are independent and never revised under commercial pressure. Non-negotiable since 1998.  ·  International assignments accepted on a case-by-case basis — experience is global.
Feasibility Study Consultants & Feasibility Study Company  ·  Since 1998  ·  Lender-Grade  ·  Agency-Compliant

Feasibility Study Consultants Serving Lenders, Agencies, Private and Institutional Capital

"Ut est rerum omnium magister usus."  —  Experience is the teacher of all things.
Julius Caesar, De Bello Civili
3,955
Feasibility Studies Completed
1,280
SBA Studies Accepted by Lenders
817
USDA Studies in Agency Financing
$40.2B
Project Value Evaluated
1998
Feasibility Consultants Since
Independent · Bankable · Built to Withstand Review SBA SOP 50 10 8 · USDA RD Instruction 5001 · USPAP-consistent

Wert-Berater, Inc. prepares independent feasibility studies for capital-intensive projects: more than 4,000 engagements since 1998, covering $40.2 billion in evaluated project value across all fifty states — including 1,280 SBA feasibility studies accepted by lenders and 817 USDA studies reviewed in agency financing. That experience spans hospitality, marina and recreation, fuel and convenience retail, healthcare and senior living, condominium and multifamily development, manufacturing, renewable energy, agricultural processing, and tribal economic development, under SBA, USDA, EB-5, conventional, and institutional financing structures.

Every study is prepared to the compliance standard its program requires. SBA studies follow SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA studies follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. All work is held consistent with USPAP principles of objectivity and documented reasoning, with fiduciary duty running to the lender and the agency, never the borrower — so each study is built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.

Primary Focus Areas SBA · USDA · EB-5 · Infrastructure · Institutional · Conventional · International
Institutional & Infrastructure
USDA B&I, EB-5, manufacturing, renewable energy, and public infrastructure requiring agency-grade independent review. Job creation, economic impact, and multi-year sustainability — documented to federal evidentiary standards.
Commercial & Mixed-Use
Hospitality, marina, resort, retail, and complex real estate financed through SBA 504/7(a), USDA, or conventional debt. Independent demand analysis, benchmarked assumptions, and complete debt-service coverage testing.
Financing-Critical Feasibility
Studies prepared in full compliance with SBA SOP 50 10 8 and USDA RD Instruction 5001. Each report integrates directly into the credit file and answers the reviewing officer's questions before they are asked.
Investment Prospectus & Capital
Prospectuses and capital feasibility for equity partners, family offices, pension funds, and tribal financing. Base, conservative, and upside scenarios, presented to institutional diligence standards.
Why Lenders and Agencies Select Wert-Berater 4,000+ engagements · 28 years · global practice
CFA · MBA · MAI-Level Standards
CFA methodology, MBA-level modeling discipline, MAI appraisal standards. Every assumption traces to a recognized source; every conclusion follows from the evidence. The result moves through credit committee and agency review without the rounds of revision that less rigorous work attracts.
USPAP-consistent methodology applied across all study types. Conclusions independently derived and documented to a standard that survives third-party audit.
Comprehensive Project Modeling
Every study ships with a fully linked financial model: 37+ tabs, zero hardcoded values, all driven from one Assumptions tab. Ten-year pro forma, ±5/10/15% sensitivity, rate stress, Monte Carlo, DCF, Z-Score, and full coverage tables — 22-point audited. A reviewer can change any assumption and watch the entire model respond.
DSCR minimums: SBA 1.15x operating / 1.00x global · USDA program-dependent · Conventional 1.20x.
Independence Non-Negotiable
Twenty-eight years; no determination ever altered under pressure. Engagements with a pre-determined outcome are declined at intake. A favorable determination from Wert-Berater carries weight precisely because it cannot be bought.
Borrowers do not direct Wert-Berater conclusions. Fiduciary duty is assigned explicitly to the lender and applicable agency.
SBA 504 / 7(a)
SOP 50 10 8
All project types · national
USDA B&I · CF · REAP · VAPG
Reg 5001
All rural development programs
EB-5 Regional Center
USCIS
Job creation · economic impact
Conventional & HBU
Bank-Grade
1.20x DSCR · credit committee
International
Global
Case-by-case · full standard
Contact Us
Wert-Berater, Inc. · 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651
111 Town Square Pl Ste 1238 PMB 657834, Jersey City, NJ 07310
539 W. Commerce St #8486, Dallas, TX 75208
Direct: +1 310-857-2443 ext. 800 · Engagement-specific fee quotes within one business day.
About Wert-Berater, Inc.

Independent, finance-driven feasibility analysis since 1998.

Our Story · Firm History · Leadership · Analytical Team
Our Story Established 1998 · Laguna Beach, California
Who We Are

Established in 1998, Wert-Berater, Inc. provides independent, bankable feasibility studies for projects where financing approval, regulatory compliance, and capital risk are material considerations. Over more than a quarter century the firm has completed in excess of four thousand engagements, and its work has supported lender, agency, and institutional decision-making across a wide range of complex, capital-intensive projects, including those subject to SBA, USDA, and conventional bank underwriting review. That body of experience spans commercial real estate, hospitality, marina and recreation, fuel and convenience retail, healthcare and senior living, manufacturing, renewable energy, and agricultural processing, in markets across all fifty states and, on a case-by-case basis, internationally.

Our Core Discipline

Feasibility analysis is our core focus. Supporting disciplines — including commercial appraisal, valuation, and highest and best use analysis — are applied where required to strengthen underwriting credibility and risk assessment. The firm does not rely on borrower-supplied market data; it conducts its own primary and secondary research, benchmarks every operating assumption against recognized sources such as RMA and IBISWorld, and documents the basis for each conclusion so that the analysis survives third-party scrutiny.

Analytical Standards

What distinguishes the firm is the combination of institutional analytical rigor and genuine independence. Each study is built to CFA, MBA, and MAI-equivalent standards and is held consistent with USPAP principles of objectivity and documented reasoning. The financial model underlying every engagement is fully linked and free of hardcoded values, allowing any reviewing party to test the sensitivity of the conclusions to changes in the underlying assumptions.

Independence, Non-Negotiable

We focus on delivering defensible, underwriting-credible analysis so decision-makers can allocate capital with confidence. Fiduciary duty runs exclusively to the lender and the agency, and determinations are never revised under commercial pressure. This discipline — independence that is non-negotiable, analysis that is sourced and auditable, and a determination that follows the evidence — is the foundation on which the reputation of the firm with lenders and agencies has been built.

Firm History & Milestones From institutional underwriting to 4,000+ independent studies

The name Wert-Berater is German for “value advisor” — a deliberate statement of the firm’s function. Wert-Berater, Inc. was founded in 1998 on a conviction formed over sixteen years inside institutional finance: that capital allocation decisions fail not from a lack of optimism, but from a lack of independent, documented analysis. The firm’s founding business plan was narrow by design — serve the lender and the agency, not the borrower; build every conclusion on sourced evidence; and never revise a determination under commercial pressure. That plan has not changed in twenty-eight years.

1982 → 2026 · read left to right
1982
Institutional foundation — Lehman Brothers
Donald Safranek, MSc begins his career at Lehman Brothers, advancing into the underwriting and management of a $700 million real estate equity portfolio. The risk-modeling discipline of that era — test every assumption, document every source — becomes the analytical DNA of the future firm.
1990s
Global asset underwriting — Hatfield Philips
Senior asset management and underwriting roles across residential, hospitality, commercial, industrial, energy, and infrastructure assets in Europe, the Middle East, the Americas, and the Caribbean.
1998
Wert-Berater, Inc. founded Est. 1998
The firm is established as an independent feasibility study practice with fiduciary duty exclusively to lenders and agencies. First engagements are completed for conventional bank underwriting review.
2000s
SBA and USDA practice established
The firm becomes a recurring source of independent feasibility studies for SBA 504 and 7(a) lenders and for USDA Rural Development programs — Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grants — building the program-compliance methodology still in force today.
2010s
National coverage; EB-5 and institutional work added
Engagements expand across all fifty states and, on a case-by-case basis, internationally. EB-5 Regional Center and direct-investment feasibility, highest and best use studies, investment prospectus work, and economic impact analysis are added to the core practice.
2020
USDA OneRD / Instruction 5001 era
As USDA consolidates its guarantee programs, the firm aligns its USDA methodology to the consolidated rule and RD Staff Instruction 5001 — the standard under which every USDA study is now prepared.
2025
SBA SOP 50 10 8 compliance
SBA study scope, DSCR testing (1.15x operating / 1.00x global), and documentation standards are updated to the current SOP 50 10 8, with every model built fully linked and free of hardcoded values so reviewers can stress any assumption.
2026
4,000+ engagements · $40.2 billion evaluated
Approaching four thousand completed feasibility studies — including 1,280 SBA studies accepted by lenders and 817 USDA studies reviewed in agency financing — supporting more than $40.2 billion in evaluated project value. The firm launches its secure client portal, delivering studies, fully linked financial models, and research documentation through a dedicated, access-controlled engagement workspace.
The Firm in Two Minutes
Volume The firm, the team, $40.2 billion in evaluated project value, and how to engage us — captioned, with score.
Wert-Berater firm brochure cover ⬇  Download the Firm Brochure PDF · 23 pages, landscape · the firm, engagement experience, methods, team, and how to order studies.
Leadership
Donald Safranek, MSc — Founder & President, feasibility study consultant
DS
Donald Safranek, MSc
Founder & President
MSc EconomicsLLB LawLSERollins College

Wert-Berater is led by Donald Joseph Safranek, whose professional background combines institutional finance, economics, law, and global asset underwriting. Mr. Safranek holds dual graduate degrees from the London School of Economics, including an MSc in Economics and an LLB in Law, and a Bachelor of Arts in English Literature and Economics from Rollins College.

His professional foundation was established starting at Lehman Brothers in 1982, where he advanced into roles involving the underwriting and management of a $700 million real estate equity investment portfolio — institutional risk modeling, structured equity investments, and disciplined capital deployment that forms the analytical framework underpinning Wert-Berater feasibility methodology.

Mr. Safranek later held senior asset management and underwriting roles with Hatfield Philips, Inc., a division of Lehman Brothers, leading risk assessment, asset repositioning, and capital strategy across residential, hospitality, commercial, industrial, energy, and infrastructure assets in Europe, the Middle East, the Americas, and the Caribbean.

Bruce E. Jones, MAI — Senior Valuation Advisor, feasibility study consultant
BJ
Bruce E. Jones, MAI
Senior Valuation Advisor
MAIASA-GCBCACMEA

Bruce E. Jones brings nearly four decades of experience in commercial and residential real estate valuation, with deep expertise in complex, income-producing, and going-concern assets. He has held the MAI designation since 1987 from the Appraisal Institute and is an Accredited Senior Appraiser with the American Society of Appraisers, including the ASA Going Concern specialty.

Mr. Jones brings more than 12 years of experience as a business and equipment appraiser, enabling comprehensive valuation support for feasibility studies involving real estate, operating businesses, and tangible assets. A Certified General Real Estate Appraiser licensed in multiple states, he has extensive experience providing valuation analysis in adversarial and highly scrutinized contexts, including litigation support and expert testimony.

Credentials: MAI, Appraisal Institute · Accredited Senior Appraiser (ASA), Going Concern specialty · Certified General Real Estate Appraiser (multi-state) · nearly 40 years of valuation experience · business and equipment appraisal expertise.

Senior-Led Analytical Team Specialists in finance, economics, valuation, market analysis, and underwriting support

Wert-Berater feasibility studies are produced by a senior-led analytical team. While engagements are directed and reviewed at the senior level by the President, the analytical process is supported by experienced specialists who contribute domain-specific research, modeling, and validation. Team members are engaged exclusively on finance-driven feasibility assignments where accuracy, defensibility, and credibility are critical.

Bohdan Syvka — Senior Market Analyst, feasibility study consultant
BS
Bohdan Syvka
Senior Market Analyst
EconomicsUniversity of LondonMarket Research

Bohdan Syvka leads the market and competitive analysis underpinning Wert-Berater feasibility studies. Holding a degree in Economics from the University of London, he conducts the independent primary and secondary research the firm relies upon in place of borrower-supplied projections.

His work spans trade-area definition, demographic and demand analysis, comparable rate and absorption studies, and competitive supply assessment across the firm's SBA, USDA, EB-5, and conventional engagements. He benchmarks each market against RMA and IBISWorld data and documents the sourcing behind every demand conclusion so the analysis withstands lender and agency review.

Focus: Market & competitive analysis · demand and absorption studies · demographic and trade-area research · RMA / IBISWorld benchmarking.

Penko Velkov — Senior Financial Analyst, feasibility study consultant
PV
Penko Velkov
Senior Financial Analyst
Insurance MathematicsSofia UniversityFinancial Modeling

Penko Velkov builds and audits the financial models at the center of every Wert-Berater engagement. A graduate of Sofia University "Saint Kliment Ohridski" in Bulgaria with a concentration in Insurance Mathematics, he brings a quantitative, actuarial discipline to the firm's pro forma architecture.

He constructs each model on a single Assumptions-tab foundation with no hardcoded values, then carries it through the firm's full analytical suite — 10-year pro forma, DSCR, sensitivity at plus or minus 5/10/15 percent, interest-rate stress testing, Monte Carlo simulation, DCF, and Z-Score — before subjecting it to the 22-point model audit and zero-error recalculation required prior to release.

Focus: Financial modeling · DSCR & ratio analysis · sensitivity and rate-stress testing · Monte Carlo, DCF, Z-Score · 22-point model audit.

Hristo Nedelechev — Senior Market Analyst, feasibility study consultant
HN
Hristo Nedelechev
Senior Market Analyst
Harvard ExtensionALM CandidateMarket Research

Hristo Nedelechev contributes senior market analysis across Wert-Berater's feasibility engagements, with a focus on demand assessment, competitive supply, and trade-area research. He is a Master of Liberal Arts candidate at Harvard Extension, bringing graduate-level analytical training to the firm's market work.

His research supports the independent demand and absorption conclusions underpinning SBA, USDA, EB-5, and conventional studies, with each finding sourced and documented to withstand lender and agency review.

Focus: Market & competitive analysis · demand and absorption research · trade-area and demographic analysis.

Able Taye — Senior Market Analyst, feasibility study consultant
AT
Able Taye
Senior Market Analyst
Market ResearchFeasibility AnalysisData & Demographics

Able Taye serves as a senior market analyst supporting Wert-Berater's feasibility studies, contributing primary and secondary research, data analysis, and competitive assessment across the firm's program areas. He holds a BA from Lion Hotel and Tourism College, Ethiopia — hospitality training that informs his work on the firm’s lodging and tourism-related engagements.

His work reinforces the firm's commitment to independent, evidence-based conclusions, with market data drawn from recognized sources and benchmarked for credibility in lender- and agency-reviewed financing environments.

Focus: Market & competitive analysis · primary and secondary research · data and demographic analysis.

Alema Shaimerdenova — Senior Financial & Risk Analyst
AS
Alema Shaimerdenova
Senior Financial & Risk Analyst
MBABS FinanceRisk AnalysisSince 2013

Alema Shaimerdenova has been with Wert-Berater since 2013, building the firm’s financial models and leading its risk analysis across every sector the practice serves — hospitality, fuel and travel centers, marinas and storage, healthcare and senior living, manufacturing, agriculture, and beyond.

She holds an MBA and a BS in Finance, and her work anchors the firm’s coverage, sensitivity, and stress analysis — the architecture that lets an underwriter change any assumption and watch the determination respond. A risk-analysis specialist, she pressure-tests every projection before it carries the firm’s signature.

Deyvid Stratev — Junior Research, feasibility study consultant
DS
Deyvid Stratev
Junior Research — Feasibility Study Consultant
Primary ResearchData CollectionMarket Support

Deyvid Stratev supports Wert-Berater’s feasibility engagements as a junior research analyst, contributing primary and secondary research, data collection and verification, and competitive-supply documentation across the firm’s program areas. He is currently attending the D.A. Tsenov Academy of Economics in Svishtov, Bulgaria, pairing formal economics training with the firm’s applied research practice.

His work feeds the evidentiary base of the firm’s studies — sourced demographics, verified comparables, and documented market evidence prepared to the standard lender and agency review requires.

Focus: Primary & secondary research · data collection and verification · competitive-supply documentation.

Services

Studies built for the credit file, not the brochure.

SBA · USDA · EB-5 · HBU · Conventional · Prospectus · Economic Impact
Core Feasibility Study Services Click any service for full detail
SBA 504 & 7(a) Feasibility Study
Independent feasibility studies prepared in full compliance with SBA SOP 50 10 8, structured to support CDC, lender, and SBA underwriter review at every level.
SOP 50 10 8504 & 7(a)DSCR AnalysisProject Modeling
USDA Feasibility Study
Agency-compliant feasibility studies for USDA Business & Industry, Community Facilities, Rural Energy for America, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs, governed by USDA RD Staff Instruction 5001.
Reg 5001B&I · CF · REAP · VAPGRural Development
EB-5 Visa Feasibility Study
USCIS-aware feasibility studies for EB-5 Regional Center and direct investment projects, produced to a standard consistent with securities-grade due diligence and immigration counsel expectations.
USCISRegional CenterJob CreationEconomic Impact
Highest and Best Use Studies
Independent highest and best use analysis evaluating the legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive use of complex real estate and land assemblages.
USPAP-ConsistentMulti-ScenarioMAI-Level
Conventional Lending Feasibility
Bank-grade feasibility studies for conventional commercial real estate and business acquisition financing, structured to meet the analytical depth required by credit officers, credit committees, and secondary-market underwriters.
Bank-GradeDSCR 1.20xCredit Committee Ready
Project Planning Studies
Pre-financing project planning analysis covering site evaluation, market demand assessment, development programming, and financial pre-feasibility — produced before the formal lender engagement process begins.
Pre-FinancingSite AnalysisMarket Demand
Asset & Portfolio Performance Monitoring
Ongoing quarterly engagements for family offices, funds, lenders, and sponsors: the fully linked model refreshed with actuals — variance, coverage, covenant compliance, and market re-checks. Fixed retainers, principal-reviewed, portal-delivered.
QuarterlyFamily Offices & FundsCoverage & CovenantsFixed Retainer
Distressed Asset & Workout Feasibility
Independent restructure-extend-liquidate determinations for special assets: the model rebuilt on actuals, orderly and forced liquidation values, re-underwritten market evidence, and restructuring scenarios — committee-ready and litigation-durable.
Special AssetsLiquidation AnalysisReceivers & CounselExpedited
The Feasibility Screen — Go / No-Go Review
A fast, fixed-fee desktop review before the full study: trade-area data, benchmark testing of the pro forma, preliminary coverage math, and a plain conclusion — proceed, revise, or do not proceed — in 3–5 business days. Fee credited toward the full study.
3–5 DaysFixed Fee, CreditedBorrowers & LendersDeal Triage
Repositioning & Adaptive Reuse Feasibility
For underperforming or obsolete assets: which alternative use the market and the numbers support — motel to multifamily, big-box to storage, office to residential — with conversion economics, demand for the new use, and coverage on the repositioned pro forma.
Adaptive ReuseConversion EconomicsValue-AddHBU-Based
Grant & Incentive Feasibility
Application-grade feasibility for grant and incentive programs — USDA REAP and VAPG, Community Facilities, and state and local incentives and tax credits — built to each program’s scoring criteria, including stacked grant-loan-credit structures.
REAP & VAPGProgram-NativeIncentive StackingAgency-Ready
Study Updates, Reliance Letters & Re-Certifications
Refresh an existing study to current data, extend reliance to a new lender or participant, or re-certify a restarted or sold credit — fast, fixed-fee, on the firm’s prior work. Fraction of a new study’s cost and time.
UpdatesReliance LettersRe-CertificationLoan Sales
Litigation Support & Expert Witness
Independent testimony and litigation-support valuation for complex, special-purpose, and going-concern assets — hotels and resorts, entertainment venues, manufacturing, wineries and golf. Going-concern allocation, real-estate-vs-business-value disputes, and property-tax appeals, led by an MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA expert.
MAI · ASA-GCGoing-ConcernProperty-Tax AppealsExpert Testimony
Specialized & Analytical Services
Beyond the study: Asset & Portfolio Performance Monitoring

For family offices, funds, lenders, and sponsors: the firm refreshes the fully linked model with each quarter’s actuals and reports variance, coverage, covenant compliance, and market trajectory — independent, principal-reviewed, fixed quarterly retainers. Learn about monitoring engagements →

Lending Programs

Program compliance is the floor, not the finish line.

SBA 504 · SBA 7(a) · USDA B&I · CF · REAP · VAPG · EB-5 · Conventional · Institutional
Regulatory Framework by Program Click any program for full detail
SBA 504
Certified Development Company debenture program for long-term, fixed-rate financing of major fixed assets.
SOP 50 10 8
SBA 7(a)
General business loan program with the broadest eligibility of any SBA product.
SOP 50 10 8
USDA B&I
Business & Industry guaranteed loan program supporting rural business development.
USDA Reg 5001
USDA CF
Community Facilities program for essential public-benefit facilities in rural areas.
USDA Reg 5001
USDA REAP
Rural Energy for America Program — grants and loan guarantees for renewable energy and efficiency.
USDA Reg 5001
USDA VAPG
Value-Added Producer Grant supporting agricultural producers entering value-added processing.
USDA Reg 5001
EB-5 / Regional Center
USCIS-governed foreign investor visa program requiring documented job creation and investment viability.
USCIS
Conventional Lending
Bank and credit union commercial real estate and business acquisition financing.
Bank-Grade
Institutional Capital
Investment prospectuses and capital feasibility for equity sponsors, family offices, pension funds, and institutional investors.
Investor-Grade
International
Cross-border infrastructure, foreign investment review, and international EB-5 sourced projects accepted on a case-by-case basis.
Global · Case-by-Case
Standards & Methodology

Every assumption traced to a source. Every conclusion audited.

20-Point Smell Test · 22-Point Model Audit · RMA · IBISWorld · USPAP-Consistent
Analytical Standards Framework
CFA-Level Financial Analysis
Discounted cash flow valuation, Monte Carlo simulation, interest-rate stress testing, Altman Z-Score bankruptcy risk, and full sensitivity analysis at plus or minus 5, 10, and 15 percent revenue variance — all documented to institutional-grade scrutiny. No conclusion is asserted without quantitative support, and no operating assumption enters the model without a documented source. Every pro forma assumption is benchmarked to RMA Annual Statement Studies, IBISWorld industry research, CoStar market data, or independent primary research, and any deviation from those benchmarks is explained with market-specific evidence rather than left to the reader to reconcile.
USPAP-consistent methodology. Every conclusion independently derived and documented to a standard that survives third-party audit.
MBA-Level Financial Modeling Discipline
Zero hardcoded values, full Assumptions-tab linkage, formula-driven throughout, and auditable at every cell. Models span 37 or more tabs, including a 10-year year-by-year pro forma, construction draw schedules, sensitivity tables, rate-stress matrices, Monte Carlo outputs, and complete ratio analysis, each accompanied by narrative commentary that explains what the numbers mean for the credit decision. The single-source architecture means a reviewer can adjust any driver — occupancy, rate, cost, or financing term — and observe the effect ripple through coverage, returns, and break-even in real time, which is precisely the transparency that institutional underwriting requires.
Every model cross-referenced against a 22-point audit checklist. Zero-error recalculation required before release.
MAI-Equivalent Market Analysis
Primary research, comparable rate grids, adjustment methodology, and reconciliation of indicated value ranges — all conducted using MAI-level rigor and consistent with USPAP standards for independence, objectivity, and documented reasoning. Comparable selection is defended rather than assumed: each comparable is verified to source, weighted on stated criteria, and adjusted through a transparent methodology so the reviewing party can follow the reasoning from raw data to supported conclusion. Where the market evidence is thin or conflicting, the study says so plainly rather than papering over the uncertainty.
Comparable selection, weighting, and adjustment methodology documented in full. No comparable accepted without source verification.
Five-Step Engagement Process
01
Project Qualification
Scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins. International assignments evaluated for scope and data availability.
02
Independent Research
Wert-Berater does not rely on borrower-supplied market data. Independent primary and secondary research conducted in all cases.
03
Financial Modeling
Full 37+ tab model built from Assumptions tab. 22-point model audit completed. DSCR, sensitivity, stress testing, Monte Carlo, DCF, and Z-Score.
04
20-Point Review
Every study passes a 20-point quality review. RMA and IBISWorld benchmarks applied. Deviations explained with market-specific evidence.
05
Principal Sign-Off
Donald Safranek, MSc personally reviews and signs every engagement. No study exits the firm without principal review.
Data Sources & Evidentiary Standards How published data becomes a defensible finding

Every quantitative claim in a Wert-Berater study traces to a published, independently verifiable source — and the citation appears where the claim does. A reviewer who can pull the same table from the same agency and reach the same figure extends the study a trust no narrative can manufacture.

The Published-Data Foundation

The core is the federal statistical system: the Census Bureau for demographics, establishments, and the permit pipeline; the Bureau of Labor Statistics for employment, wages, and escalation; the Bureau of Economic Analysis for regional income and the RIMS II multipliers behind economic-impact and EB-5 work.

Sector evidence comes from the agency that actually measures the sector — state DOT traffic counts for fuel and roadside studies, EIA energy series, FEMA flood determinations, USDA data for agriculture, CMS and state licensure records for healthcare, and state registration files for marina and storage demand.

Above the public record sit the recognized benchmarks — RMA Annual Statement Studies, IBISWorld, and national association series — plus the firm’s own field surveys, rate shops, and assessor verification, documented to the same audit standard.

How Data Becomes Analysis

Every assumption carries its source and vintage, so the reviewer can check both the figure and its freshness. Material findings are triangulated: one source is a hypothesis; two independent sources — a DOT count and observed volumes, a registration base and competitor occupancy — make a finding.

Published coefficients feed the accepted formulas with the arithmetic shown, and every operating ratio is tested against its benchmark corridor — any figure outside the range is justified in writing or revised. The fully linked model preserves the chain from cited input to coverage ratio, so evidence and conclusion can never drift apart.

Accepted Methodologies, Applied Completely

The firm applies every analysis and evaluation methodology its reviewing audience accepts, matched to the asset class rather than forced onto it — and the formulas appear in the study so the committee can audit the computation.

On the market side: traffic-count capture for fuel and roadside retail; penetration and fair-share analysis for lodging; saturation and absorption arithmetic for storage; age- and income-qualified penetration for senior housing and healthcare; registration-base capture for marinas; demonstrated absorption pace for condominium sell-outs; probabilistic P50/P90 resource assessment for energy; and supply-shed mass balance for processing and agriculture.

On the financial and evaluation side: ten-year discounted cash flow with valuation reconciliation; direct capitalization cross-checked against the appraisal’s approaches; sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent; interest-rate stress to +3.0 percent; Monte Carlo simulation with disclosed input distributions; Altman Z-Score trajectory; full ratio analysis with written interpretation; liquidation analysis of orderly and forced recovery; and RIMS II input-output modeling for economic impact and job creation. Whatever methodology the program, the lender, or the asset demands — it is in the toolkit, and it is shown in full.

Why Lenders and Investors Accept It

The studies are checkable. An underwriter can reproduce any demand figure independently, which converts review from an argument about credibility into a fast verification exercise — fewer committee question cycles, cleaner files for loan review and participations.

The same discipline holds in adversarial settings where weak sourcing collapses: audit, agency oversight, litigation, secondary-market diligence. Investors read it identically — a projection built from the public record is an instrument they can underwrite. Credibility here is not rhetorical; it is architectural.

Program Compliance

SBA’s SOP 50 10 expects independent feasibility analysis on evidence the lender can rely upon — demonstrated here at the program’s 1.15x operating and 1.00x global coverage minimums. USDA’s 7 CFR Part 5001 requires each feasibility factor evidenced for agency review; the firm’s studies map source-by-source onto that framework, which is why 817 have passed through Rural Development financing.

EB-5 findings rest on the BEA RIMS II methodology adjudicators recognize. Conventional credits meet the interagency expectation of documented market analysis, with sourcing aligned to the appraisal’s USPAP evidence standards — reviewed by the firm’s MAI-designated valuation advisor — so the two documents in the credit file corroborate each other. One evidentiary standard satisfies every reviewer who will ever open the file.

Experience

4,000+ engagements. $40.2 billion evaluated. Twenty-eight years.

Completed Engagement Tombstones · Project Gallery · Sector Experience
Completed Engagements Selected tombstones · party names withheld · total project cost as evaluated
Tombstones reflect a selection of completed engagements. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Total project cost figures represent the project as evaluated, not amounts financed. Additional engagement summaries are available to lenders and agencies on request.
Selected Engagement Experience Representative of 4,000+ completed studies across 28 years

Wert-Berater experience spans SBA, USDA, EB-5, conventional, institutional, and tribal financing environments across commercial real estate, energy, manufacturing, hospitality, marina, and agricultural projects. The following is a representative selection.

Marina & Boat Storage
SBA 504 · USDA B&I · dry-stack, wet-slip, rackominium
SBA · USDA
Gas Station / C-Store / QSR
SBA 504 · fuel retail, convenience, quick-service
SBA
Hospitality & Resort
Hotels, RV resorts, event venues, wedding venues
SBA · Conv.
Assisted Living & Healthcare
USDA B&I · USDA CF · senior care, rural health
USDA
Multifamily & Condominium
Conventional · condo sell-out, rental, mixed-use
Conv.
Wineries & Event Venues
SBA 504/7(a) · boutique lodging, agritourism
SBA
Renewable Energy
USDA REAP · solar, efficiency improvements
USDA
Manufacturing & Industrial
USDA B&I · institutional · processing facilities
USDA · Inst.
Tribal Development
Sovereign tax structures · component financing
Tribal
Highest & Best Use
Land assemblage · multi-scenario analysis
HBU
Industries Served
Commercial Real Estate
Retail · Office · Mixed-Use
Acquisition, construction, refinance
Energy & Infrastructure
Renewable · Utility-Scale
REAP, B&I, institutional capital
Manufacturing & Ag
Processing · Value-Added
B&I, VAPG, conventional
Hospitality & Leisure
Resort · Marina · Venue
SBA 504/7(a), conventional
Contact Wert-Berater

Offices in California, Texas & New Jersey. Engagements nationwide.

How to reach the firm — pick the box that fits
1
Starting a project? Use Request a Fee Quote — a fixed-fee proposal is emailed within one business day. If your documents are confidential, execute the Instant NDA first, then upload.
2
Have questions first? Send a Project Inquiry — it goes straight to the President — or schedule a Zoom qualification call.
3
Institutional procurement? Use RFP Submissions on the right — municipalities, public agencies, and tribal governments welcome.
Every path ends the same way: a response within one business day, a fixed fee quoted before any work begins, and an independent determination that is never for sale.
Request a Fee Quote — one minute to complete, response within one business day

The fastest way to start. Tell us the project type, location, and financing program — a fixed-fee quote is emailed to you within one business day. No call required.

Fees are quoted per engagement — no success fees, no contingent pricing. Tell us the program, the approximate total project cost, the state, and your timing, and Donald Safranek, MSc will respond with an engagement-specific quote within one business day. Rush delivery is accepted on a case-by-case basis for an additional fixed fee — quoted up front, never contingent on findings.

Send a Project Inquiry

For questions, scope discussions, or anything that is not yet a quote request. Your message goes directly to the President’s desk.

>
Upload Project Documents

Send plans, budgets, financial statements, or appraisals securely. Files arrive attached to your name and project — nothing is shared outside the engagement.

Accepted: PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, images, ZIP. For files over 25 MB, request portal access instead. [EDIT-NOTE: active once hosted on the Aplus server — the button has no effect in local preview]
Confidentiality Statement. All documents transmitted to Wert-Berater, Inc. are received and held in strict confidence. Materials are used solely to evaluate and prepare the independent feasibility analysis for which they are provided, are accessible only to the assigned analytical team, and are never published, shared with third parties, or disclosed outside the engagement except to the lender, CDC, or federal agency to which our fiduciary duty runs — or as required by law. Files transfer to a private, access-controlled inbox that is not publicly readable. A mutual non-disclosure agreement is available on request prior to any submission.
RFP Submissions — Lenders, CDCs & Agencies

For institutional procurement — formal solicitations, qualifications packages, and sole-source engagements.

Wert-Berater regularly supports municipalities, public agencies, and tribal governments and enterprises — RFPs, RFQs, and sole-source inquiries are welcome, and studies are prepared to the procurement and review standards public and tribal financing requires.

Issuing a request for proposal for an independent feasibility study? Submit it here with any attachments — a substantive response, proposal or qualification questions, follows within one business day. Rush engagements for deals already in underwriting are accepted case by case for an additional fixed fee.

Instant Mutual NDA — e-sign, auto counter-signed, PDF emailed to you

Confidentiality before you share anything: e-sign in one minute and a fully counter-signed PDF is emailed to you instantly.

Before sharing confidential project information, you may execute a mutual NDA with Wert-Berater, Inc. instantly. Complete the form below and type your full legal name as your electronic signature; the Agreement is counter-signed automatically by Donald Safranek, MSc, President, and a fully executed, branded PDF — including the legal disclosure required for your state — is generated and emailed to you on the spot. A copy is retained by the firm.

Read the full NDA terms before signing

Summary of the Mutual NDA you are executing (the PDF contains the complete text): mutual confidentiality of non-public information exchanged to evaluate a potential feasibility engagement; standard exclusions (public, previously known, independently developed, or third-party information); a permitted-disclosure carve-out reflecting the firm’s fiduciary duty — the firm may disclose Counterparty information to the lender, CDC, or government agency involved in the contemplated financing, and either party may disclose as required by law; no license granted and no obligation to proceed; a 3-year confidentiality term from last disclosure; injunctive relief available; a state-specific electronic-signature disclosure under the federal E-SIGN Act and your state’s electronic transactions law (UETA, or ESRA for New York); governing law California, venue Orange County.

Preview note: the NDA e-sign form functions only on the hosted site (PHP). Test one execution after deployment, including email receipt.
Contact Information

Prefer to call, write, or visit? Direct lines, the firm’s address, and response standards.

PrincipalDonald Safranek, MSc — President
California office1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651
New Jersey office111 Town Square Pl Ste 1238 PMB 657834, Jersey City, NJ 07310
Texas office539 W. Commerce St #8486, Dallas, TX 75208
Telephone+1 310-857-2443 ext. 800
Emailemail
Websitewww.wert-berater.com
InternationalAccepted case-by-case · experience is global
Who initiates: In SBA and USDA programs, Wert-Berater is engaged by the borrower or through the lender or CDC. Lender confirmation required before work begins. Banks, lenders, and CDCs have differing rules — check with your contact as to which they require. For feasibility studies, in our experience the borrower engages us.
Timeline: Standard studies completed in 10-15 business days from receipt of complete project data. Complex or international assignments may require 20-25 business days.
Independence: Wert-Berater conclusions follow the data. Engagements where the outcome is pre-determined are declined.
Our Offices

California, New Jersey, and Texas — with engagements nationwide and, on a case-by-case basis, internationally.

California Office
1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
New Jersey Office
111 Town Square Pl Ste 1238 PMB 657834
Jersey City, NJ 07310
Texas Office
539 W. Commerce St #8486
Dallas, TX 75208
SOP 50 10 8504 & 7(a)DSCR AnalysisProject Modeling
SBA 504 & 7(a) Feasibility Study
Independent feasibility studies prepared in full compliance with SBA SOP 50 10 8, structured to support CDC, lender, and SBA underwriter review at every level.
Overview

The SBA feasibility study establishes whether a proposed project is economically viable and capable of supporting the requested debt. Wert-Berater prepares the study to the analytical depth expected by Certified Development Companies, participating lenders, and the SBA Loan Guaranty Processing Center, anticipating the questions a credit officer and an SBA reviewer will raise and answering each with sourced, defensible analysis.

Both the 504 debenture program and the 7(a) general business loan program require independent feasibility analysis where the project involves a new business, a change of ownership, or where the lender exercises discretion under SOP 50 10 8. The study covers market feasibility, financial feasibility, and a complete project financial model, with every operating assumption benchmarked to RMA and IBISWorld data.

On the market side, the analysis defines the trade area, quantifies demand, profiles the competitive supply, and reconciles the project program against what the market will absorb. On the financial side, it carries the project through a 10-year pro forma, operating and global debt-service coverage, sensitivity at three stress levels, interest-rate stress testing, Monte Carlo simulation, discounted cash flow, and an Altman Z-Score.

The result is a determination a lender and the agency can rely upon — favorable, favorable with conditions, or unfavorable — with the basis for that determination documented in full so it withstands review at every level without rounds of revision.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the lender or CDC, not the borrower directly. Borrower-initiated inquiries are welcome, but lender confirmation is required before work begins.
What's Included
  • Executive summary and feasibility determination
  • Market & competitive analysis with primary research
  • Management and operations assessment
  • 10-year financial pro forma built from an Assumptions tab
  • DSCR analysis — operating and global
  • Sensitivity analysis at plus or minus 5/10/15 percent
  • Interest rate stress testing
  • Monte Carlo simulation, DCF, and Z-Score
  • Sources & uses and project cost review
  • Plainly stated risk analysis
Key Parameters
Governing authoritySBA SOP 50 10 8
DSCR minimum1.15x operating / 1.00x global
DeliverablePPTX study + linked XLSX model
Typical timeline10–15 business days
Related
USDA Feasibility Study →Conventional Lending Feasibility →Project Financial Modeling →
Reg 5001B&I · CF · REAP · VAPGRural Development
USDA Feasibility Study
Agency-compliant feasibility studies for USDA Business & Industry, Community Facilities, Rural Energy for America, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs, governed by USDA RD Staff Instruction 5001.
Overview

USDA Rural Development requires independent feasibility analysis for guaranteed loans and grants under its business and community programs. Wert-Berater prepares each study to the structure and evidentiary standard expected by the Rural Development State Office and the national office, in full conformity with RD Staff Instruction 5001.

The study documents market demand, technical and operational viability, management capacity, and financial sustainability, with every conclusion supported by independent research rather than borrower-supplied projections. Each operating assumption is benchmarked to recognized industry data and any deviation is explained with market-specific evidence.

Because USDA engagements frequently involve rural markets where comparable data is thinner than in metropolitan areas, the firm places particular emphasis on primary research — direct investigation of the trade area, the competitive set, and the demand drivers — so that the demand conclusion rests on evidence rather than assumption.

The financial analysis carries the project through a 10-year pro forma, debt-service coverage measured to the applicable program requirement, sensitivity and stress testing, and a plainly stated risk analysis, producing a determination structured for direct submission with the lender or borrower application.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the lender or the borrower depending on program; submission is to the USDA Rural Development State Office.
What's Included
  • Project description and program eligibility
  • Economic feasibility and market demand analysis
  • Technical feasibility (where applicable)
  • Management and organizational assessment
  • 10-year financial pro forma
  • DSCR analysis to program requirements
  • Sensitivity and stress testing
  • Sources & uses review
  • Independent risk analysis
Key Parameters
Governing authorityUSDA RD Staff Instruction 5001
DSCR minimumProgram-dependent
ProgramsB&I · CF · REAP · VAPG
Typical timeline10–20 business days
Related
SBA 504 & 7(a) →Economic Impact Studies →Project Planning Studies →
USCISRegional CenterJob CreationEconomic Impact
EB-5 Visa Feasibility Study
USCIS-aware feasibility studies for EB-5 Regional Center and direct investment projects, produced to a standard consistent with securities-grade due diligence and immigration counsel expectations.
Overview

The EB-5 program requires that each qualifying investment create or preserve at least the statutory minimum number of jobs. Wert-Berater prepares feasibility studies that document the commercial viability of the underlying project and support the job-creation methodology used in the economic analysis, to a standard consistent with securities-grade due diligence.

The study is structured to integrate with the business plan, economic impact report, and offering materials prepared by immigration and securities counsel, so that the feasibility conclusion, the job-creation model, and the offering disclosures present a single, internally consistent picture of the project.

Commercial viability is the foundation of any defensible EB-5 analysis: if the project cannot succeed on its own economic merits, the job creation that supports the petition is at risk. The firm therefore tests the project as it would any other financing-critical engagement, with independent market analysis and a complete financial model.

From that foundation the study addresses targeted employment area context, the methodology underlying direct and indirect job creation, investment viability, and the risk factors that counsel must disclose, producing analysis that supports both the immigration filing and the investor diligence process.

Who engages this: Engaged by the project developer, Regional Center, or immigration/securities counsel.
What's Included
  • Project and market feasibility analysis
  • Job creation methodology (direct and indirect)
  • TEA qualification context
  • 10-year financial pro forma
  • Investment viability assessment
  • Risk disclosure support
  • Integration with economic impact analysis
Key Parameters
Governing frameworkUSCIS / INA 203(b)(5)
Job standard10 jobs per qualifying investment
DeliverableFeasibility study + supporting model
Typical timeline15–25 business days
Related
Economic Impact Studies →Investment Prospectus →USDA Feasibility Study →
USPAP-ConsistentMulti-ScenarioMAI-Level
Highest and Best Use Studies
Independent highest and best use analysis evaluating the legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive use of complex real estate and land assemblages.
Overview

The highest and best use study tests development alternatives against the four classic criteria — legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive — and identifies the use that produces the greatest supportable value. Wert-Berater applies MAI-equivalent rigor, with each scenario carried through a full financial model rather than a back-of-envelope estimate.

HBU analysis is frequently required where a lender, agency, or institutional investor must understand the optimal program for a site before committing capital, particularly on land assemblages or transitional properties where the existing use may not represent the property to its best advantage.

The analysis begins with what the law and the physical site permit, then narrows to what is financially feasible given current market conditions and construction economics, and finally identifies which of the feasible alternatives is maximally productive. Each candidate use is modeled independently so the alternatives can be compared on a consistent basis.

The study concludes with a reconciliation that explains why the selected use prevails over the alternatives, documented to a standard consistent with USPAP and defensible in lender, agency, or litigation review.

Who engages this: Engaged by owners, developers, lenders, or institutional investors evaluating a site or assemblage.
What's Included
  • Legally permissible use analysis (zoning, entitlements)
  • Physically possible use analysis (site, access, utilities)
  • Financially feasible use analysis
  • Maximally productive use determination
  • Scenario-by-scenario financial modeling
  • Reconciliation and conclusion
  • Supporting market evidence
Key Parameters
MethodologyUSPAP-consistent / MAI-level
OutputMulti-scenario comparison + conclusion
DeliverableStudy + model per scenario
Typical timeline12–20 business days
Related
Project Planning Studies →Project Financial Modeling →Conventional Lending Feasibility →
Bank-GradeDSCR 1.20xCredit Committee Ready
Conventional Lending Feasibility
Bank-grade feasibility studies for conventional commercial real estate and business acquisition financing, structured to meet the analytical depth required by credit officers, credit committees, and secondary-market underwriters.
Overview

Conventional lenders increasingly require independent third-party feasibility analysis for complex or higher-risk transactions, particularly construction, single-tenant, and specialized-use projects where the bank cannot rely on a simple comparable. Wert-Berater prepares studies to credit-committee standards, with a debt-service-coverage floor of 1.20x and full sensitivity analysis.

The study is designed to integrate directly into the credit memorandum and underwriting file, presenting the market and financial analysis in the form and at the depth a credit committee expects so that it strengthens rather than complicates the approval process.

The market section establishes demand and competitive position through independent research; the financial section carries the project through a 10-year pro forma, coverage analysis, three-level sensitivity, and interest-rate stress testing sized to the proposed structure.

Because conventional transactions are not bound by a single agency standard, the firm tailors the analysis to the specific concerns of the lender and the transaction, while holding to the same independence and documentation discipline applied across every engagement.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the bank or credit union; borrower-initiated inquiries welcomed with lender coordination.
What's Included
  • Market and competitive analysis
  • Management and operations review
  • 10-year financial pro forma
  • DSCR analysis (1.20x minimum)
  • Three-level sensitivity analysis
  • Interest rate stress testing
  • Sources & uses review
  • Risk analysis
Key Parameters
StandardBank / credit committee grade
DSCR minimum1.20x
DeliverablePPTX study + linked XLSX model
Typical timeline10–15 business days
Related
SBA 504 & 7(a) →Highest and Best Use →Project Financial Modeling →
Pre-FinancingSite AnalysisMarket Demand
Project Planning Studies
Pre-financing project planning analysis covering site evaluation, market demand assessment, development programming, and financial pre-feasibility — produced before the formal lender engagement process begins.
Overview

Many projects benefit from an independent planning study before financing is sought. Wert-Berater evaluates site characteristics, market demand, and preliminary financial feasibility so owners and developers can refine the program, test their assumptions, and approach lenders with confidence rather than discovering a fatal flaw during underwriting.

The planning study is structured so its analysis can be carried forward into a full SBA, USDA, or conventional feasibility study when financing is pursued, avoiding duplicated work and preserving the research investment as the project advances.

At this stage the emphasis is on identifying the questions that will determine whether the project is financeable: Is there genuine demand? Does the site support the intended program? Do the preliminary economics clear the coverage thresholds a lender will require?

The deliverable gives the owner an honest, independent read on these questions and a clear path to financing, including the additional analysis and documentation a formal feasibility study will require.

Who engages this: Engaged by owners and developers in the pre-financing planning stage.
What's Included
  • Site evaluation and constraints analysis
  • Market demand assessment
  • Development programming
  • Preliminary financial pre-feasibility
  • Order-of-magnitude cost review
  • Path-to-financing recommendations
Key Parameters
StagePre-financing planning
OutputPlanning study + preliminary model
Carries forwardInto full feasibility study
Typical timeline7–15 business days
Related
Highest and Best Use →SBA 504 & 7(a) →USDA Feasibility Study →
CFA-LevelInstitutional CapitalJV & Equity Structuring
Investment Prospectus & Capital Feasibility
Institutional-grade investment prospectuses and capital feasibility analyses for equity partners, joint ventures, family offices, pension funds, and private capital.
Overview

Where a project is funded through equity rather than, or in addition to, debt, Wert-Berater prepares an investment prospectus to CFA-equivalent documentation standards. The analysis covers market opportunity, project structure, pro forma returns, and risk-adjusted performance, presented in the form institutional capital expects.

The prospectus is designed to integrate into institutional diligence processes and supports equity structuring for joint ventures, family offices, pension funds, and private capital, giving each party a common, independently prepared basis for evaluating the opportunity.

The returns analysis spans internal rate of return, net present value, cash-on-cash yield, and equity multiple, modeled across base, conservative, and upside scenarios so that the distribution of outcomes — not merely the expected case — is visible to the investor.

Because equity capital bears first loss, the analysis gives particular attention to the downside: the assumptions that matter most, the sensitivity of returns to each, and the conditions under which the investment thesis would fail. This candor is what distinguishes an independent prospectus from a marketing document.

Who engages this: Engaged by sponsors, equity partners, joint ventures, family offices, pension funds, or institutional investors.
What's Included
  • Market opportunity analysis
  • Project and capital structure
  • 10-year pro forma with returns analysis
  • IRR, NPV, cash-on-cash, equity multiple
  • Base, conservative, and upside scenarios
  • Risk-adjusted performance assessment
  • Sponsor qualifications summary
Key Parameters
StandardCFA-equivalent documentation
AudienceInstitutional / private equity
MetricsIRR · NPV · CoC · equity multiple
Typical timeline15–25 business days
Related
Economic Impact Studies →Project Financial Modeling →EB-5 Feasibility Study →
IMPLAN · RIMS IIDirect · Indirect · InducedJob Creation
Economic Impact Studies
Independent economic impact analyses measuring the direct, indirect, and induced employment, output, and fiscal effects of a proposed project.
Overview

Economic impact studies quantify the broader economic contribution of a project to its region, measuring not only the jobs and output created directly by the project but the indirect and induced activity that follows through the regional economy. Wert-Berater produces these analyses using IMPLAN, RIMS II, or REMI frameworks and cites them to recognized state and federal standards.

Economic impact analysis is frequently required as a component of USDA Business & Industry and EB-5 submissions, and is used independently by public agencies, economic development authorities, and institutional investors evaluating the public and private benefit of a project.

The analysis distinguishes the construction phase from the ongoing operating phase, reports employment, output, value-added, and fiscal (tax revenue) effects, and documents the multiplier methodology so that the results can be independently verified rather than taken on faith.

Where the study supports an EB-5 petition, the job-creation figures are developed to integrate directly with the feasibility study and the business plan, ensuring the immigration filing rests on a single consistent economic model.

Who engages this: Engaged as a standalone analysis or as a component of a USDA, EB-5, or institutional engagement.
What's Included
  • Direct, indirect, and induced employment
  • Output and value-added effects
  • Fiscal (tax revenue) impact
  • Construction-phase and operating-phase analysis
  • Multiplier methodology documentation
  • Integration with feasibility or EB-5 study
Key Parameters
FrameworksIMPLAN · RIMS II · REMI
MeasuresEmployment · output · fiscal
Common useUSDA B&I · EB-5 · public agency
Typical timeline10–18 business days
Related
EB-5 Feasibility Study →USDA Feasibility Study →Investment Prospectus →
37+ Tab ArchitectureZero HardcodeMonte Carlo · DCF22-Point Audit
Project Financial Modeling
Standalone financial model development to institution-grade standards — produced as an auditable deliverable, not a working spreadsheet.
Overview

Every Wert-Berater model is built so that no value is hardcoded: all figures derive from a single Assumptions tab, every cell is formula-driven, and the entire workbook recalculates to zero errors. Models span 37 or more tabs and are audited against a 22-point checklist before release, so the deliverable is an auditable analytical instrument rather than a static spreadsheet.

The model can be delivered as a component of a feasibility study or as a standalone deliverable for projects that require institution-grade pro forma architecture, including sponsor-side planning, investor diligence, and lender underwriting support.

The architecture is deliberately transparent: because every output traces to a documented input, a reviewing party can change any driver and watch coverage, returns, and break-even respond immediately. This is the difference between a model that can be interrogated and one that must simply be trusted.

The analytical suite includes a 10-year year-by-year pro forma, construction draw schedule, sensitivity at three stress levels, interest-rate stress testing, Monte Carlo simulation, discounted cash flow valuation, Altman Z-Score, and complete ratio tables, each accompanied by narrative commentary explaining its meaning for the decision at hand.

Who engages this: Engaged as a component of a feasibility study or as a standalone modeling assignment.
What's Included
  • Single Assumptions-tab architecture (zero hardcode)
  • 10-year year-by-year pro forma
  • Construction draw schedule
  • Sensitivity tables (plus or minus 5/10/15 percent)
  • Interest rate stress testing
  • Monte Carlo simulation
  • DCF valuation and Z-Score
  • Complete ratio tables with narrative
  • 22-point model audit
Key Parameters
Architecture37+ tabs, fully linked
DisciplineZero hardcode, formula-driven
QC22-point model audit, zero-error recalc
DeliveryStandalone or with study
Related
SBA 504 & 7(a) →Investment Prospectus →Conventional Lending Feasibility →
SOP 50 10 8
SBA 504
Certified Development Company debenture program for long-term, fixed-rate financing of major fixed assets.
Overview

The SBA 504 program finances owner-occupied real estate and long-life equipment through a Certified Development Company debenture paired with a third-party lender loan, giving small businesses access to long-term, fixed-rate financing on favorable terms. A feasibility study is required by SOP 50 10 8 when the project involves a new business, a change of ownership, or where the lender or CDC exercises discretion.

Wert-Berater has prepared 504 studies across the full range of eligible project types, including hospitality, marina and recreation, fuel and convenience retail, food and beverage, healthcare and senior living, industrial, and commercial real estate, in markets nationwide.

Each study tests the project against the operating and global coverage thresholds the program requires and documents the market demand, competitive position, and management capacity on which the projections depend.

The deliverable is structured for the CDC, the participating lender, and the SBA processing center, anticipating the standard areas of review so the analysis moves through approval efficiently.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the CDC or participating third-party lender.
What's Included
  • Feasibility determination
  • Market & competitive analysis
  • 10-year pro forma + DSCR
  • Sensitivity and stress testing
  • Project cost / sources & uses review
Key Parameters
AuthoritySBA SOP 50 10 8
DSCR1.15x operating / 1.00x global
StructureCDC debenture + lender loan
UseOwner-occupied fixed assets
Related
SBA Feasibility Service →SBA 7(a) →Conventional →
SOP 50 10 8
SBA 7(a)
General business loan program with the broadest eligibility of any SBA product.
Overview

The 7(a) program is the primary and most flexible loan guaranty program administered by the SBA, supporting working capital, business acquisition, real estate, and equipment financing under a single structure. Feasibility requirements parallel the 504 program under SOP 50 10 8, with independent analysis expected for new businesses, changes of ownership, and higher-risk transactions.

Wert-Berater prepares 7(a) studies for franchises, specialty retail, professional services, and complex acquisition transactions, each structured for lender underwriting and SBA Loan Guaranty Processing Center review.

Acquisition and change-of-ownership transactions receive particular attention, since the projections must reconcile historical performance with the buyer business plan and demonstrate that the combined entity can service the proposed debt.

As in every engagement, the market and financial conclusions rest on independent research and a fully linked model, producing a determination a lender can carry into committee with confidence.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the participating 7(a) lender.
What's Included
  • Feasibility determination
  • Market & competitive analysis
  • 10-year pro forma + DSCR
  • Sensitivity and stress testing
  • Acquisition / change-of-ownership analysis where applicable
Key Parameters
AuthoritySBA SOP 50 10 8
DSCR1.15x operating / 1.00x global
StructureLender loan with SBA guaranty
UseBroadest SBA eligibility
Related
SBA Feasibility Service →SBA 504 →Conventional →
USDA Reg 5001
USDA B&I
Business & Industry guaranteed loan program supporting rural business development.
Overview

The USDA Business & Industry program guarantees loans that create or preserve employment and improve the economic and environmental climate in rural communities. Feasibility requirements are governed by RD Staff Instruction 5001, and the study must demonstrate both market and technical viability to the satisfaction of the Rural Development State Office.

Wert-Berater has prepared B&I studies for marina expansions, agricultural processors, rural healthcare, food distribution, manufacturing, and utility-scale projects across a wide range of rural markets.

Because B&I projects often anchor employment in smaller communities, the analysis gives close attention to the durability of demand and the resilience of the project under adverse conditions, documented through sensitivity and stress testing.

The financial analysis is sized to the coverage expectation appropriate to the guarantee, and the entire study is structured for direct submission through the participating lender to the agency.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the participating lender; submission to the USDA Rural Development State Office.
What's Included
  • Economic feasibility analysis
  • Market demand and competitive analysis
  • Technical and management assessment
  • 10-year pro forma + DSCR
  • Independent risk analysis
Key Parameters
AuthorityUSDA RD Staff Instruction 5001
DSCRVaries by guarantee level
EligibilityRural areas, defined population
UseBusiness development / job creation
Related
USDA Feasibility Service →USDA CF →USDA REAP →
USDA Reg 5001
USDA CF
Community Facilities program for essential public-benefit facilities in rural areas.
Overview

The Community Facilities program finances essential community facilities — healthcare, public safety, educational, and other public-benefit infrastructure — in rural areas. Feasibility studies address community need, service-area demographics, and financial sustainability, demonstrating that the facility is both warranted and able to sustain itself over the life of the financing.

Wert-Berater prepares CF studies to document the demand for and sustainability of the proposed facility under the requirements of the program, with conclusions grounded in independent demographic and service-area analysis.

Because these facilities serve a public function rather than a purely commercial one, the analysis frames sustainability in terms of the revenue sources available to the borrower, whether fees, tax support, or program reimbursement, and tests their adequacy against operating cost.

The study is structured for the lender or public and non-profit borrower and for submission to USDA Rural Development, with the community-need case documented to agency expectations.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the lender or public/non-profit borrower; submission to USDA Rural Development.
What's Included
  • Community need and demand analysis
  • Service-area demographics
  • Financial sustainability analysis
  • 10-year pro forma
  • Independent risk analysis
Key Parameters
AuthorityUSDA RD Staff Instruction 5001
FocusEssential community facilities
EligibilityRural areas, public benefit
UseHealthcare · safety · education
Related
USDA Feasibility Service →USDA B&I →USDA VAPG →
USDA Reg 5001
USDA REAP
Rural Energy for America Program — grants and loan guarantees for renewable energy and efficiency.
Overview

The Rural Energy for America Program provides grants and loan guarantees for renewable energy systems and energy efficiency improvements at agricultural operations and rural small businesses. Feasibility studies document energy production projections, payback periods, and technical viability to the standard the program requires.

Wert-Berater prepares REAP feasibility and technical reports to the standard required for program application and lender review, integrating the energy analysis with the financial case for the investment.

The analysis quantifies expected energy production or savings, translates that into a financial return and payback period, and assesses the technical viability of the proposed system so that the application rests on engineering as well as economics.

Where the project also requires debt, the study carries the supporting financial analysis to the depth a participating lender expects, producing a single document that serves both the program application and the credit review.

Who engages this: Engaged by the agricultural producer, rural small business, or participating lender.
What's Included
  • Energy production projections
  • Technical viability assessment
  • Payback period and financial analysis
  • 10-year pro forma where applicable
  • Program eligibility documentation
Key Parameters
AuthorityUSDA RD Staff Instruction 5001
FocusRenewable energy / efficiency
EligibilityAg producers, rural small business
OutputEnergy + financial feasibility
Related
USDA Feasibility Service →USDA B&I →USDA VAPG →
USDA Reg 5001
USDA VAPG
Value-Added Producer Grant supporting agricultural producers entering value-added processing.
Overview

The Value-Added Producer Grant program supports agricultural producers who are entering value-added processing activities — converting raw commodities into higher-value finished or intermediate products. Feasibility studies document market demand, operational viability, and the benefit accruing to the producer from the value-added enterprise.

Wert-Berater prepares VAPG feasibility studies to the structure and evidentiary standard required for program application, with conclusions supported by independent market research.

The market analysis establishes that genuine demand exists for the value-added product and that the producer can reach it; the operational analysis confirms that the processing activity is viable at the scale proposed; and the financial analysis quantifies the resulting producer benefit.

Together these elements form the evidentiary basis the program requires, presented in the form expected for application review.

Who engages this: Engaged by the agricultural producer or producer group.
What's Included
  • Market demand analysis
  • Operational viability assessment
  • Producer benefit analysis
  • Financial pro forma
  • Program eligibility documentation
Key Parameters
AuthorityUSDA RD Staff Instruction 5001
FocusValue-added processing
EligibilityAgricultural producers
OutputDemand + viability feasibility
Related
USDA Feasibility Service →USDA B&I →USDA REAP →
USCIS
EB-5 / Regional Center
USCIS-governed foreign investor visa program requiring documented job creation and investment viability.
Overview

The EB-5 program grants conditional permanent residency to foreign investors whose qualifying investment creates the statutory minimum number of jobs. Feasibility studies document investment viability, job-creation methodology, targeted employment area qualification, and project risk, forming part of the evidentiary record before USCIS.

Wert-Berater prepares EB-5 feasibility analysis to a standard consistent with securities counsel and USCIS adjudication requirements, structured to integrate with the business plan, economic impact report, and offering materials.

The viability analysis tests the project on its own commercial merits, since the job creation that supports each petition depends on the project actually performing as projected. The job-creation methodology is then developed transparently so that the basis for the employment figures is clear to the adjudicator.

The study addresses the project risk factors that counsel must disclose to investors, producing analysis that supports the immigration filing and the investor diligence process alike.

Who engages this: Engaged by the project developer, Regional Center, or immigration/securities counsel.
What's Included
  • Investment viability analysis
  • Direct and indirect job creation methodology
  • TEA qualification context
  • Risk disclosure support
  • Integration with economic impact analysis
Key Parameters
AuthorityUSCIS / INA 203(b)(5)
Job standard10 jobs per investment
FocusForeign investor financing
OutputViability + job creation
Related
EB-5 Feasibility Service →Economic Impact →Investment Prospectus →
Bank-Grade
Conventional Lending
Bank and credit union commercial real estate and business acquisition financing.
Overview

Conventional financing covers bank and credit union commercial real estate and business acquisition loans made outside the SBA and USDA guaranty programs, where the institution bears the full credit risk. Studies are produced to credit-committee standards with a debt-service-coverage floor of 1.20x and full sensitivity analysis.

Wert-Berater prepares conventional studies that integrate directly into the credit memorandum and underwriting file, presenting the analysis in the form and at the depth a credit committee expects.

Because conventional transactions are not bound by a single agency standard, the firm tailors the scope to the specific concerns of the lender and the transaction — construction risk, single-tenant exposure, specialized use, or absorption — while holding to the same independence and documentation discipline applied throughout.

The market and financial sections together give the institution an independent read on whether the project supports the proposed debt, with the conclusions traceable to documented research and a fully linked model.

Who engages this: Engaged by or through the bank or credit union.
What's Included
  • Market and competitive analysis
  • Management and operations review
  • 10-year pro forma + DSCR (1.20x)
  • Three-level sensitivity analysis
  • Sources & uses review
Key Parameters
StandardBank / credit committee grade
DSCR1.20x minimum
StructureConventional bank / CU loan
UseCRE / business acquisition
Related
Conventional Service →SBA 504 →Highest and Best Use →
Investor-Grade
Institutional Capital
Investment prospectuses and capital feasibility for equity sponsors, family offices, pension funds, and institutional investors.
Overview

For equity-funded projects, Wert-Berater prepares investment prospectuses and capital feasibility analyses to CFA-equivalent standards. The analysis spans internal rate of return, net present value, cash-on-cash yield, and equity multiple modeling across base, conservative, and upside scenarios, so the full distribution of outcomes is visible rather than a single expected case.

These engagements support joint ventures, family offices, pension funds, and tribal financing environments evaluating complex project structures, providing each participant a common, independently prepared basis for the decision.

The analysis gives particular attention to the downside, identifying the assumptions that most affect returns and the conditions under which the investment thesis would fail, because equity capital bears first loss and informed investors require that candor.

The result is documentation that withstands institutional diligence and supports the structuring of the equity, presented to the same standard the firm applies to its lender- and agency-reviewed work.

Who engages this: Engaged by equity sponsors, JV partners, family offices, pension funds, or institutional investors.
What's Included
  • Market opportunity analysis
  • Capital and project structure
  • Returns analysis (IRR · NPV · CoC · multiple)
  • Base / conservative / upside scenarios
  • Risk-adjusted performance assessment
Key Parameters
StandardCFA-equivalent documentation
AudienceInstitutional / private equity
MetricsIRR · NPV · CoC · equity multiple
UseEquity / JV structuring
Related
Investment Prospectus Service →Economic Impact →EB-5 →
Global · Case-by-Case
International
Cross-border infrastructure, foreign investment review, and international EB-5 sourced projects accepted on a case-by-case basis.
Overview

The experience of the firm extends beyond domestic United States markets. International assignments — including cross-border infrastructure, foreign investment review, and internationally sourced EB-5 projects — are accepted on a case-by-case basis following a scope and data-availability review at qualification, since the depth and reliability of market data vary considerably by jurisdiction.

The same CFA, MBA, and MAI-equivalent analytical standards apply regardless of geography, and the firm is candid at intake about where data limitations would constrain the analysis so that expectations are set before the engagement begins.

Leadership experience spans Europe, the Middle East, the Americas, and the Caribbean, drawn from senior asset-management and underwriting roles across residential, hospitality, commercial, industrial, energy, and infrastructure assets in those regions.

That background allows the firm to assess cross-border projects with an understanding of the currency, regulatory, and market-structure considerations that distinguish international work from domestic engagements, while holding to the same independence and documentation discipline throughout.

Who engages this: Engaged by international sponsors, lenders, or institutional investors following case-by-case qualification.
What's Included
  • Scope and data-availability review at qualification
  • Market and competitive analysis
  • Financial pro forma to applicable standard
  • Currency and cross-border risk considerations
  • Independent risk analysis
Key Parameters
BasisCase-by-case acceptance
StandardCFA · MBA · MAI-equivalent
ExperienceEurope · MENA · Americas · Caribbean
QualificationScope + data review required
Related
Investment Prospectus →EB-5 →USDA B&I →
Schedule a Project Qualification

Tell us about your project. We will tell you the truth about it.

Project Qualification30-Minute ZoomNo Obligation
Schedule a Project Qualification Conversation
Project qualification calls are conducted by Donald Safranek, MSc directly. Select a date and time below, tell us about the engagement, and we will confirm scope, timeline, and fee before any work begins. Domestic and international inquiries welcome.
Scheduling note: open times below are confirmed the moment you book — the slot is yours. You’ll receive an email confirmation right away, with your Zoom link to follow before the call.
How scheduling works — three simple steps
1
Pick a date and time. Weekday slots, shown in your own time zone. Green is open, grey is taken.
2
Tell us about the project. A few fields — name, lender or organization, financing program, and a short description.
3
Your slot is confirmed instantly. You receive an email confirmation right away, with your Zoom link to follow. Booked times disappear from the calendar immediately.
Helpful to have ready: project type and location, estimated total project cost, the financing program if known, and your timeline. None are required — the call is exactly for working these out.
1  ·  Select a Date
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Weekday appointments, 8:00 AM – 2:00 PM Eastern Time (shown converted to your selected time zone). Open times are confirmed instantly when you book.
2  ·  Your Time Zone
30 min
Times are shown in your selected zone with the Eastern Time equivalent — appointments are confirmed against Eastern Time. open   blocked/booked
3  ·  Select a Time
4  ·  Your Details
Your appointment:
Select a date  ·  Select a time
Your call is confirmed. A confirmation email is on its way, with your Zoom link to follow. Need to reschedule? Call +1 310-857-2443 ext. 800.
Direct+1 310-857-2443 ext. 800
Emailemail
Format30-minute Zoom · conducted by the principal
Upload Project Documents
Accepted: PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, images, ZIP. For files over 25 MB, request portal access instead.
Confidentiality Statement. All documents transmitted to Wert-Berater, Inc. are received and held in strict confidence. Materials are used solely to evaluate and prepare the independent feasibility analysis for which they are provided, are accessible only to the assigned analytical team, and are never published, shared with third parties, or disclosed outside the engagement except to the lender, CDC, or federal agency to which our fiduciary duty runs — or as required by law. Files transfer to a private, access-controlled inbox that is not publicly readable. A mutual non-disclosure agreement is available on request prior to any submission.
Feasibility Study · Sports & Recreation · New Mexico · Party Names Withheld

Sports Complex Feasibility Study

Regional Public Sports District · Anthony, New Mexico · Doña Ana County · Borderplex region
Sports complex with stadium and fields
Sports Complex Feasibility Study
$115,000,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
Tax-Exempt Municipal Bond
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE as a phased public sports district
Study Conclusion
17.9% unlevered project-level IRR over the approved ten-year operating forecast
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

A three-phase, approximately $115 million public sports district structured so that no phase is required to financially carry facilities belonging to a later stage of maturity. Phase I establishes demand through participation-driven outdoor facilities financed primarily with public-purpose capital; Phase II expands capacity only after utilization confirms absorption; Phase III introduces higher-revenue indoor and event facilities once the campus operates as a year-round destination. The approved ten-year operating forecast produces an unlevered project-level IRR of 17.9 percent.

What the Project Included

A regional, multi-sport destination combining outdoor tournament fields with weather-independent indoor capacity: an arena, three indoor basketball/volleyball courts, and seventeen pickleball courts, with hard construction representing approximately 59 percent of total project cost concentrated in durable, long-lived sports assets.

Capital Structure

$115,000,000 single tax-exempt municipal bond issuance — 100% of total project cost, including capitalized interest and funded reserves.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The study's principal analytical task was proving that a $115 million single-issuance bond could be reconciled with phased absorption. Key risks identified: construction execution at district scale, utilization variability, revenue concentration during tournament periods, and operating cost inflation — mitigated through phase-gating tied to demonstrated absorption, diversified programming, fixed-rate debt, and funded reserves stress-tested under downside scenarios.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Travel Center & Freight Services · West Virginia · Party Names Withheld

Truck Stop Feasibility Study

Interstate Travel Center & Truck Stop · I-64 / US-35 interchange (NE quadrant) · Scott Depot, West Virginia
Truck stop and travel plaza
Truck Stop Feasibility Study
$48,571,365
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
USDA Reg 5001
Program / Financing Framework
Economically and technically feasible in concept; NOT yet fully capitalized on the terms modeled
Study Conclusion
$14,571,365 capital-stack gap at study date — ≈30% of TPC, stated plainly as the principal open item
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

A corridor-based freight-service asset — not a conventional highway retail outparcel — evaluated under USDA Regulation 5001 for whether the site, at scale, can convert national truck-parking scarcity into durable operating revenue. The approximately 60-acre build envelope sits within a 366-acre tract at a major interstate interchange, with the largest capital allocations directed at exactly the elements that drive freight-service economics: parking, fueling, and the driver-services building.

What the Project Included

1,000 truck parking spaces, 30 high-speed diesel pumps with storage and canopy, 20 gasoline lanes, a main building of approximately 50,000 square feet, a truck wash, and CAT scales — a program built around parking and driver utility rather than fuel sales alone, positioned to capture FHWA-documented overnight and mandated-rest demand.

Capital Structure

$25,000,000 proposed loan plus $9,000,000 imputed land equity identified at study date — leaving a $14,571,365 capital-stack gap (≈30% of TPC) documented as the principal open item.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The defining challenge was capital-stack honesty: against $48.6 million of total project cost, identified sources covered roughly 70 percent. The study states this plainly — the project is economically justified in concept and projected operating scale, but cannot be characterized as fully financeable without qualification until the $14.6 million gap is resolved. Strong operations do not by themselves establish feasibility when the capital stack is incomplete.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Medical Office Development · Alabama · Party Names Withheld

Medical Office Feasibility Study

Medical Office Village Subdivision · Fern Avenue · Foley, Alabama · Baldwin County
Medical office building exterior
Medical Office Feasibility Study
$38,900,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
Development Feasibility
Program / Financing Framework
Development program evaluated across market, technical, and financial dimensions; the value-engineering pass adopted in the study reduced total project cost by nearly 8 percent while preserving the nineteen-building campus design
Study Conclusion
$2.0–2.5M upfront + $2.5–3.0M ten-year savings from the value-engineering pass — TPC cut nearly 8%
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

A 12.18-acre suburban medical village proposing approximately 68,000 square feet of medical office space distributed across nineteen buildings of 3,500 to 4,920 square feet — a deliberately decentralized campus design serving physician practices that favor identity, signage, and potential ownership over space in a consolidated MOB. Tenant interest at study date was oversubscribed, including specialties favoring condominium-style ownership, supporting a hybrid lease-and-sale absorption strategy.

What the Project Included

Nineteen medical office pads with full site infrastructure: internal roadways, parking fields, stormwater systems, and utility laterals, with pad-consolidation flexibility engineered in — adjacent 3,500 SF pads sharing utility laterals can convert to 7,000 SF suites if demand favors larger tenants.

Capital Structure

The study evaluated the proposed financing structure against program coverage minimums under base-case and stressed assumptions, with sources and uses reconciled to the development budget across the hybrid lease-and-sale absorption program. Specific facility terms are withheld consistent with engagement confidentiality.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The multi-building format carries a structural per-square-foot cost premium: infrastructure, lobbies, and utility connections are duplicated across nineteen structures, and the village consumes acreage faster than a consolidated design. The study's value-engineering pass — rationalized parking, consolidated stormwater basins, clustered utilities, phased roadways, reduced ornamental landscaping — identified $2.0–2.5 million in upfront savings and $2.5–3.0 million in ten-year operating efficiencies, cutting total project cost by nearly 8 percent without compromising the patient or provider experience.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Cold Storage & Logistics · Louisiana · Party Names Withheld

Cold Storage Feasibility Study

Airport-Integrated Cold Storage & Logistics Center · Crofton Road, adjacent to Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport · Kenner, Jefferson Parish, Louisiana
Cold storage warehouse
Cold Storage Feasibility Study
$33,656,250
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
USDA Reg 5001
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE — subject to six specific conditions
Study Conclusion
Loan sized to a Year 2 DSCR floor of 1.40x — coverage discipline over maximum proceeds
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

A Phase I cold storage and logistics facility integrated with the region's international airport, evaluated under USDA Regulation 5001 across six alternative building programs from 110,000 to 250,000 square feet using a 90+ tab financial model. The recommended 125,000-square-foot configuration carries a total project cost of $33,656,250 ($269.25/SF), reaches 84 percent stabilized utilization in Year 2 with a 41.7 percent EBITDA margin, and supports 65–85 permanent jobs with $3.2–4.5 million in annual payroll.

What the Project Included

Temperature-controlled warehouse and logistics space with ammonia refrigeration, 72-hour backup diesel generation, building design exceeding local wind-load standards, and full regulatory compliance programs (EPA Risk Management Plan, OSHA Process Safety Management), supported by a 10 percent construction contingency of $2,923,296.

Capital Structure

$17,481,604 senior secured loan (51.9% of TPC) at 9.50% on 25-year amortization, sized to a Year 2 DSCR floor of 1.40x; equity of $16,174,646 (48.1%).

Feasibility Study Challenges

Three challenges shaped the determination. First, leverage discipline in a 9.50 percent rate environment: at the 1.40x DSCR floor, a 5 percent revenue shortfall thins coverage to 1.07x and a 10 percent shortfall breaches it — the study sized the loan at 51.9 percent of cost rather than maximizing proceeds. Second, Gulf Coast hurricane and flood exposure, addressed through hardened design, comprehensive windstorm/flood coverage, and FEMA zone analysis. Third, ammonia-system regulatory compliance, budgeted explicitly at $75,000–150,000 initial and $30,000–50,000 annually.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Fuel Retail & QSR · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Gas Station Feasibility Study

Fuel & Convenience Development — SE Corner · Northlake Blvd & Coconut Blvd (southeast corner) · Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33412
Gas station fuel canopy
Gas Station Feasibility Study
$7,200,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE — Phase I ESA pending at study date
Study Conclusion
3.87x operating DSCR with the companion station operating; 4.67x standalone
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

New construction of a 4,971-square-foot convenience store with sixteen fueling positions, two quick-service food concepts, and electric-vehicle supercharging at a signalized arterial intersection in one of Palm Beach County's fastest-growing residential corridors. Year 1 pro forma: $13,480,000 total revenue and $1,287,214 EBITDA, producing an operating DSCR of 3.87x against the 1.15x SBA minimum — 4.67x standalone before accounting for the companion station across the intersection.

What the Project Included

Ground-up development: fuel canopy and sixteen positions, full-format convenience store, dual QSR build-outs, EV supercharging infrastructure, site work, and signalized-corner access improvements.

Capital Structure

$5,052,768 permanent loan (including capitalized construction interest) on $4,920,000 of construction-to-permanent financing; borrower equity well above the SBA 10% minimum.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The analytically interesting problem was cross-corner cannibalization: the same intersection hosts a companion development on the opposite corner, so the study modeled the station both standalone (4.67x DSCR) and with the companion operating (3.87x) — feasibility holds decisively in both states. Monte Carlo simulation across 10,000 iterations varying fuel volume, margin, store revenue, QSR revenue, and expenses produced a 0.0 percent probability of breaching the SBA floor. Phase I ESA remained pending at the determination date.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Fuel Retail & QSR · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Convenience Store & Fuel Feasibility Study

Fuel & Convenience Development — SW Corner · Northlake Blvd & Coconut Blvd (southwest corner) · Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33412
Convenience store and fuel station
Convenience Store & Fuel Feasibility Study
$6,550,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE — Phase I ESA pending at study date
Study Conclusion
4.65x operating DSCR; Monte Carlo minimum 2.14x across 10,000 iterations
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Demolition and new construction of a 4,623-square-foot convenience store with fourteen fueling positions and a national-brand quick-service restaurant at the same signalized intersection. Year 1 pro forma: $15,720,182 total revenue and $1,732,117 EBITDA, producing an operating DSCR of 4.65x — 304 percent above the SBA minimum.

What the Project Included

Full redevelopment: demolition of the existing improvements, fuel canopy with fourteen positions, branded convenience store, in-store QSR, and complete site reconstruction at the corner.

Capital Structure

$4,596,198 permanent loan at 6.50% over 25 years ($372,407 annual debt service); $2,075,000 borrower equity — 31.7% of TPC, more than three times the SBA minimum injection.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Monte Carlo simulation across 10,000 iterations — simultaneously varying fuel gallons ±25%, fuel margin $0.35–0.65, store revenue ±25%, QSR revenue −50% to +20%, and operating expenses — produced a minimum DSCR of 2.14x and a 0.0 percent probability of breaching 1.15x: even the worst randomly generated combination never approached the floor. Open items at the determination date were the pending Phase I ESA and final lender/CDC identification.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Senior Living · Colorado · Party Names Withheld

Assisted Living Feasibility Study

Assisted Living Facility Acquisition · Cortez, Colorado · Montezuma County · Four Corners region
Assisted living community building
Assisted Living Feasibility Study
$1,700,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
USDA B&I · Instruction 5001
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE — guaranty recommended subject to ESA, flood, and zoning conditions
Study Conclusion
63.0% break-even occupancy — a 27.5-point cushion below projected Year 1
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Acquisition of an operating 26-unit, single-story assisted living facility by an experienced regional operator, evaluated under USDA 7 CFR Part 5001. Year 1 revenue of $1,152,029 assumes 90.5 percent average occupancy — conservative against the 100 percent occupancy confirmed by appraisal at study date — and the acquisition preserves nine rural healthcare jobs with $551,400 in annual local payroll.

What the Project Included

Going-concern acquisition of the real property, furniture, fixtures and equipment, and intangible going-concern value of an established rural assisted living operation, with single-story construction purpose-suited to resident safety and line-of-sight staff supervision.

Capital Structure

$1,350,000 USDA B&I guaranteed loan with an 85% federal guaranty (79.4% of TPC); $200,000 cash equity (11.8%); $150,000 subordinated seller note at 9.0% interest-only with a 24-month balloon.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Small-balance rural healthcare deals live or die on cushion, and the study quantified it: break-even occupancy of 63.0 percent means the facility covers all costs including debt service with only 16.4 of 26 units occupied — a 27.5-point cushion below projected Year 1 occupancy. The structural watch-items were the 24-month balloon on the subordinated seller note, which must be refinanced or retired from cash flow, and the standard pre-closing conditions: Phase I ESA, flood-zone determination, and zoning confirmation.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Industrial & Logistics · California · Party Names Withheld

Warehouse Feasibility Study

Hybrid Owner-User Industrial Acquisition · Huntwood Avenue industrial corridor · Hayward, California · Alameda County
Industrial distribution warehouse
Warehouse Feasibility Study
$13,951,404
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504 · SOP 50 10 8
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE — subject to seven stated conditions
Study Conclusion
1.72x Year 1 operating DSCR — 49.6% above the SOP minimum; 1.46x even with no rear-building lease income from Day 1
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Acquisition of a two-building, 48,560-square-foot industrial property on 1.85 acres, structured as a hybrid owner-user strategy: the 28,560-square-foot front building operated as a contractor overflow logistics platform serving Bay Area specialty trade subcontractors, with the 20,000-square-foot rear building generating stabilizing triple-net lease income. Owner occupancy of 58.8 percent exceeds the SBA 504 minimum of 51 percent by 7.8 percentage points. The $13,752,000 purchase price was validated against a contemporaneous MAI appraisal of $13,800,000 and against replacement cost of $350–$500 per square foot versus the $283.20 contract basis.

What the Project Included

A 1,200-position pallet storage operation configured across five functional zones with a seven-stream service revenue model — base pallet storage, accessorial handling, reserved blocks, rush retrieval, contractor mini-bays, logistics coordination, and ancillary services — alongside the contractual NNN lease. The competitive analysis mapped six named facilities in the ten-mile market area with zero direct overlap: no existing operator provides integrated pallet storage, handling, and project tagging for the contractor segment.

Capital Structure

$6,975,702 senior first mortgage at 8.84% over 30 years (50.00%); $4,864,000 SBA 504 debenture at 4.64% over 25 years (34.86%); $2,063,000 subordinate note at 0% interest; $48,702 cash injection — total borrower contribution of $2,111,702 or 15.14% of sources. Annual debt service: $993,006.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Two analytical problems defined the study. First, SOP 50 10 8 dual-coverage discipline: passive NNN income had to be excluded from the primary operating test, so the startup logistics business alone was required to clear 1.15x — it achieved 1.72x in Year 1, and Monte Carlo simulation across 1,000 iterations showed only a 4.2 percent probability of breaching the floor. Second, pricing defensibility: the $100-per-pallet-per-week rate is 21.7 times commodity warehouse rates per square foot, so the study validated it on three independent bases — per square foot, per cubic foot, and avoided remobilization cost of $500–$2,000 per event — concluding the customer purchases logistics services, not square footage. The October 2028 rear-lease expiration was stress-tested to a 1.46x no-lease floor case.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Hospitality & Resort · California · Party Names Withheld

Resort Feasibility Study

Hybrid Boutique Resort Refinance · Dunsmuir, California · Siskiyou County · Mount Shasta regional tourism market
Mountain resort lodge
Resort Feasibility Study
$9,426,438
Total Refinance Debt (as evaluated)
SBA 504 Refinance
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE as a stabilization-dependent refinance — $295,827 interim DSCR reserve required; SBA no-Airstream addendum case materially weaker
Study Conclusion
Stabilized DSCR 1.43x — but 0.96x in Year 1 and 1.17x in Year 2, stated plainly as ramp-period sensitivity
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Refinance of a repositioned hospitality asset transformed from a legacy 25-unit roadside motel into a 60-unit hybrid resort combining lodge rooms, rustic cabins, modern cabins, tiny homes, and Airstream-style accommodations, with approximately $7.0 million already deployed by ownership since 2022. Rather than relying on borrower-provided historicals, the study built a market-supported underwriting framework: differentiated ADRs of $176–$248 by unit type producing a blended stabilized ADR of approximately $217, occupancy ramping from 57.0 percent to a stabilized 64.5 percent, and stabilized revenue of approximately $3.19 million with NOI of $1,147,623 after a 2.0 percent reserve allowance — a 36.0 percent margin.

What the Project Included

A mixed-format, experience-driven lodging platform positioned above traditional motels, competitive with boutique and short-term-rental supply, and below luxury resort pricing in a small, seasonal Northern California tourism market driven by Mount Shasta, river access, and outdoor recreation.

Capital Structure

$4,990,438 bank first mortgage at 8.100% over 300 months; $4,436,000 SBA debenture at 5.725% — total refinance debt of $9,426,438 with annual debt service of $800,260.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The study's defining task was distinguishing stabilized supportability from ramp-period risk — and stating both without softening. Projected coverage of 0.96x in Year 1 and 1.17x in Year 2 falls below the 1.25x lender-comfort threshold, so the study quantified the required interim DSCR reserve at $295,827 ($235,666 Year 1; $60,161 Year 2) rather than adjusting assumptions to make the problem disappear. When SBA-related review requested a coverage case excluding the twelve Airstream units, the addendum recomputed the deal on a 48-unit basis — stabilized DSCR of 1.16x, below threshold through Year 6 — and concluded plainly that the no-Airstream case is not supportable on the original stabilized basis without additional structural credit support or reduced leverage. The determination was narrowed, not revised, under underwriting pressure.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Marine Storage · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Boat & RV Storage Feasibility Study

437-Space Dry-Stack Boat & RV Storage Development · Sarasota, Florida · Sarasota County · FEMA Zone X
Boat and RV storage facility
Boat & RV Storage Feasibility Study
$23,750,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504 · SOP 50 10 8
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE WITH CONDITIONS — four conditions precedent, led by an expired Phase I ESA requiring update before closing
Study Conclusion
Year 2 stabilized DSCR 1.60x — all 49 rate/occupancy stress combinations through +2.5% pass SBA minimums; 35.5% ten-year equity IRR
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Ground-up development of a 437-space marine and recreational-vehicle storage facility on 3.871 acres of industrial-zoned land: 350 dry-stack boat positions inside a 79,864-square-foot hurricane-rated pre-engineered metal building, plus 87 RV and trailer spaces. The site sits in FEMA Zone X (minimal flood hazard) — a meaningful underwriting distinction for coastal Florida marine assets. The construction budget was validated at $143.99 per square foot for the PEMB structure, at the low end of the applicable RSMeans range, with a 5 percent contingency.

What the Project Included

A demand-driven storage platform serving the Sarasota boating market, underwritten on a Year 1 average occupancy ramp of 47.5 percent rising to stabilization in Year 2 — deliberately conservative entry assumptions rather than stabilized-day-one optimism.

Capital Structure

Classic 50/30/20 SBA 504 stack: $11,875,000 bank first mortgage at 6.10% with one year interest-only; $7,125,000 CDC debenture at 5.45% over 20 years; $4,750,000 equity ($3,562,500 investor; $1,187,500 sponsor). Annual principal and interest from Year 2: $1,512,592.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The determination was favorable but conditioned, and the conditions were stated as conditions — not buried. The Phase I ESA was 44 months old at the study date, beyond regulatory currency, and its update was made a condition precedent to closing rather than a footnote. Three further conditions followed: lender and CDC confirmation of the SBA 504 operating-business determination, personal guaranties from all owners of 20 percent or more, and confirmation of SBA eligibility for the development management fee. The study also flagged the sponsor's dual role as developer and property manager as a governance consideration. Coverage discipline anchored the analysis: a full 49-combination stress grid across interest-rate and occupancy scenarios, every combination through +2.5 percent passing SBA minimums, with the +2.5 percent rate case still producing 1.30x.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Energy Services · Michigan · Party Names Withheld

Oilfield Services Feasibility Study

Multi-Basin Well-Servicing Expansion · Headquartered Troy, Michigan · Operations: Permian, Williston, Eagle Ford, Appalachian, Haynesville
Oilfield services equipment
Oilfield Services Feasibility Study
$17,900,000
Capitalization (as evaluated)
USDA B&I · Reg 5001
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE / FAVORABLE across all five feasibility dimensions — economic, market, technical, financial, and management
Study Conclusion
Minimum DSCR 2.48x across the ten-year term — average 3.19x, peak 4.28x, no period below coverage
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Expansion financing for an established oilfield well-servicing company — founded 2012, more than 150 field personnel — operating across five major U.S. producing basins: Permian, Williston, Eagle Ford, Appalachian, and Haynesville. The expansion is anchored by two long-term master service agreements with a supermajor and a large-cap independent producer, representing approximately $60 million in contracted revenue over sixty months and more than 65 percent of projected revenue through 2030. Company revenue grew roughly 200 percent in the twenty-four months preceding the study.

What the Project Included

Fleet and equipment expansion to service contracted multi-basin demand under a USDA Business & Industry guaranteed structure — an operating-company credit underwritten on contract quality and coverage durability rather than real-estate collateral.

Return & Coverage Profile

Project IRR of 22.4 percent; NPV of $41.3 million at a 12.5 percent weighted average cost of capital; payback in 2.6 years. Ten-year debt-service coverage averages 3.19x with a minimum of 2.48x and a Year 6 peak of 4.28x — no non-coverage periods in any projection year.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Oilfield services is a cyclical, commodity-exposed sector, and the study treated that exposure as the central underwriting question rather than an inconvenience. The analysis rested coverage on contracted rather than speculative revenue — the two master service agreements were evaluated for counterparty quality, term, and concentration, with the offsetting concentration risk stated plainly: contracts representing 65 percent or more of revenue are both the credit's strength and its single largest dependency. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated a greater-than-85-percent probability of maintaining DSCR above 1.25x across commodity-cycle scenarios, and the rapid 200-percent revenue growth was stress-examined for operational scalability rather than extrapolated forward uncritically.

Project Location
Map shows the corporate headquarters vicinity for context; field operations span five producing basins. Exact addresses are withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Bio-Industrial Manufacturing · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Biochar Manufacturing Feasibility Study

Integrated Bio-Carbon Pyrolysis Manufacturing Facility · Indiantown, Florida · Martin County
Biochar manufacturing feedstock
Biochar Manufacturing Feasibility Study
$52,688,000
Total Project Investment (as evaluated)
USDA B&I + TPEP · Reg 5001
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE recommendation for USDA TPEP and B&I — subject to final underwriting validation, engineering confirmation, and covenant structuring
Study Conclusion
Baseline DSCR 4.11x — above 2.5x even under −10% EBITDA or +200 basis-point stress; five-year probability of default approximately 4.5%
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

A $52,688,000 integrated bio-carbon (biochar) pyrolysis manufacturing facility producing approximately 28,750 metric tons annually — approximately $1,915.93 of invested capital per annual ton. Base-case revenue of approximately $34,375,000 is anchored by an industrial biochar offtake of $20,500,000 (59.7 percent of revenue) and carbon-credit monetization of $8,900,000 (25.9 percent), with the balance in specialty, energy, and soil-amendment channels. Projected EBITDA of $16,500,000 against annual debt service of approximately $4,012,000 yields a baseline coverage of 4.11x, with the Year 1 monthly ramp moving from 1.92x in January to 5.18x by December.

What the Project Included

One of the first feasibility studies prepared under the USDA Timber Production Expansion Program (TPEP) framework in combination with a Business & Industry guarantee under 7 CFR Part 5001 — a dual-program structure for timber-feedstock bio-industrial manufacturing.

Technology Basis

Continuous-pyrolysis vertical retort technology with more than thirty industrial installations, supplemented by fourteen traveling-grate systems deployed since 1986 — more than forty years of documented industrial operation, evaluated as proven process equipment rather than venture-stage technology.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Biochar sits at the intersection of commodity manufacturing and an immature carbon-credit market, and the study refused to let the second category carry the first. Revenue quality was tiered: contracted industrial offtake was underwritten as the load-bearing element, while carbon-credit revenue — a quarter of the top line in a market without mature price discovery — was stress-tested rather than capitalized at face value. Coverage holds above 2.5x even with EBITDA reduced 10 percent or rates up 200 basis points, and breakeven revenue of $21,884,566 sits 36 percent below base case. Equipment risk was addressed through deployment history rather than vendor representations. The favorable recommendation was explicitly conditioned on final underwriting validation, independent engineering confirmation, and covenant structuring — scope boundaries stated, not blurred.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Highest & Best Use Study · Adaptive Reuse · North Carolina · Party Names Withheld

Building Repurposing Highest & Best Use Study

17-Story Office Tower Repositioning · Tower Boulevard · Durham, North Carolina · Durham County
Downtown office tower
Building Repurposing Highest & Best Use Study
$95,000,000
Total Project Cost — Concluded Scenario
Highest & Best Use · Ten-Scenario DCF
Engagement Framework
HIGHEST AND BEST USE: market-rate apartment program with moderate retail and a destination restaurant (Scenarios 1–3); continuation as Class A office produced a negative project IRR
Study Conclusion
$12,500,000 land residual under the concluded program — project IRR 13.90%
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Repositioning analysis of a vacant 17-story, 184,960-square-foot tower in Durham, North Carolina — a full highest and best use study built around ten redevelopment scenarios spanning market-rate apartments, condominium sell-out, medical and life-sciences conversion, mixed-use, upper-upscale hotel, senior living, demolition with land resale, and continuation as Class A office. Each scenario was modeled through discounted cash flow with IRR, MIRR, XIRR, DSCR, ROE, and residual land value calculations, then ranked on capitalized value, land residual, debt capacity, and risk.

What the Project Included

The comparative grid put hard numbers against every path: market-rate apartments at $95,000,000 total project cost producing $121,000,000 of capitalized value and a 13.90 percent IRR; condominium sell-out at a 14.10 percent IRR; an upper-upscale hotel generating the highest revenue but carrying $110,000,000 of cost; demolition and land resale at $22,000,000; and Class A office conversion at a negative ten percent IRR — the decisive evidence that continuation in office use is not the highest and best use in today’s leasing market.

Capital Structure

Each scenario was capitalized at approximately 65 percent loan-to-cost debt with the balance — 35 percent of total project cost — as sponsor equity, with hard costs, soft costs, sales and lease-up costs, and entrepreneurial profit expectations carried separately so that the residual land value under each program could be compared on a consistent basis.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The analytical problem was discipline against wishful thinking: a highly visible tower invites every reuse idea, and the study’s job was to eliminate most of them. Heavy commercial allocations and all-large-unit residential mixes drove land residuals to breakeven or below; the hotel scenario carried the largest absolute cost and flag-related lease-up expense; and the office-continuation case, far from supporting any land value, produced a negative residual in the prevailing leasing market. The concluded apartment-anchored program won on the combination of land residual, financeability, and risk diversification rather than on any single headline figure.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Sports & Recreation · Connecticut · Party Names Withheld

Pickleball Facility Feasibility Study

20-Court Indoor Pickleball & Padel Complex · Centerpoint Drive · Middletown, Connecticut · Middlesex County
Pickleball courts facility
Pickleball Facility Feasibility Study
$18,040,063
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA · SOP 50 10 8 (eff. June 1, 2025)
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE WITH CONDITIONS — rendered under SBA underwriting standards and accepted feasibility-study practice
Study Conclusion
Downside DSCR holds at 2.37x under a 10% revenue reduction and 2.02x at −15%; revenue could fall approximately 24% from stabilized projections before coverage breaches the floor
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Proposed development of a purpose-built indoor pickleball and padel sports complex at stabilization comprising 20 total courts — 18 pickleball and 2 padel — supported by mezzanine-level food and beverage service, structured league and instructional programming, and event capability within a single integrated facility. The 25-minute drive-time trade area contains 966,341 residents and 386,789 households, more than one quarter of Connecticut’s population, with median household incomes supporting premium pricing for indoor court access.

What the Project Included

The market analysis quantified a structural supply deficit: Connecticut is estimated to hold fewer than 90 dedicated indoor courts statewide, and Middlesex County only 5 to 7, against the fastest-growing sport in the United States for three consecutive years. Using a conservative planning ratio of one dedicated court per 250–300 active players, regional equilibrium demand supports roughly 190–270 courts. The study also modeled the national saturation question directly — the conditions under which court supply growth overtakes participation — concluding that cold-weather markets such as Connecticut retain premium pricing power longest because outdoor play is limited to roughly April through October.

Capital Structure

Annual debt service of approximately $783,100 was tested against a pro forma that intentionally constrains early-year coverage during the membership and league ramp-up period, consistent with SBA SOP 50 10 8 underwriting discipline, before coverage builds well above the 1.25x–1.35x SBA minimum guideline at stabilization.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Two issues carried the underwriting weight. First, ramp-up realism: the feasibility conclusion is explicitly not predicated on aggressive growth or ideal operating conditions, so the early years were modeled with deliberately constrained coverage and the conditions precedent attach there. Second, saturation risk: the study confronted the question every lender asks about a boom sport — what happens when supply catches up — and answered it with a regional equilibrium model, break-even analysis showing an approximately 24 percent revenue cushion, and stress cases holding DSCR above 2.0x in all downside scenarios tested.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Agriculture & Horticulture · New Mexico · Party Names Withheld

Greenhouse Feasibility Study

Geothermal Greenhouse & Nursery Enterprise · Radium Springs, New Mexico · Doña Ana County
Commercial greenhouse
Greenhouse Feasibility Study
$17,350,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
USDA B&I · Reg 5001
Program / Financing Framework
FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE under 7 CFR 5001.203(i) — repayment capacity for all scheduled USDA-guaranteed debt demonstrated
Study Conclusion
DSCR of 1.52x in 2026 rising to 2.53x by 2035, with Monte Carlo simulation confirming resilience under uncertainty
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Acquisition of an established greenhouse and nursery enterprise in Radium Springs, Doña Ana County — more than 20 acres of geothermal-heated greenhouses with secured groundwater rights providing 2.3 times the water required at full production, evaluated for a USDA Business & Industry guaranteed loan under Regulation 5001. The site sits 20 minutes from Las Cruces, 1.5 hours from El Paso, and within same-day distribution reach of markets across New Mexico, Texas, and Arizona, in a national nursery and garden industry generating more than $54 billion annually.

What the Project Included

The economic feasibility analysis confirmed labor availability through the county’s agricultural workforce and the plant- and soil-science graduate pipeline from the nearby land-grant university; the technical analysis confirmed that geothermal heating materially reduces energy-price exposure while the secured water rights neutralize the binding constraint on greenhouse operations in the arid Southwest; and the market analysis benchmarked the operation against regional and national competitors, most of which operate with limited capital reserves.

Capital Structure

Purchase of business assets of $16,500,000 funded by the USDA-guaranteed loan plus equity; $100,000 of working capital contributed by the borrower; and $750,000 of closing costs and fees funded from loan proceeds, consistent with USDA B&I norms — a total project cost of $17,350,000.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The rate structure carried the principal risk: the B&I loan floats on a Wall Street Journal prime-based adjustable rate, so the study stress-tested coverage against rate movement and a five percent operating-cost increase, with DSCR remaining above the USDA minimum in each case. Competitive pressure from regional growers and the seasonality of nursery demand were addressed through capacity-utilization analysis and a distribution strategy spanning three states, and the break-even calculations required under 5001.203(i) confirmed solvency margins throughout the projection period.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Cold Storage & Logistics · Texas · Party Names Withheld

Cold Storage Feasibility Study

102,471 SF Refrigerated Warehouse · Axiom Drive corridor · Amarillo, Texas · Potter County
Cold storage warehouse
Cold Storage Feasibility Study
$16,000,000
Construction Cost Basis (as evaluated)
Bank / SBA 504
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE — the project meets the requirements of lenders across economic, technical, market, financial, and management factors
Study Conclusion
DSCR rising from 1.32x to 1.70x on fixed annual debt service of $1,185,721
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Proposed development of a 102,471-square-foot refrigerated cold storage facility with 28-foot clear height and 2.77 million cubic feet of storage capacity on a 19.97-acre industrially zoned site in the Amarillo logistics corridor, positioned on Interstate 40 with rail service. The facility is designed around automated pallet handling, warehouse management software, and continuous temperature monitoring, operating a lean five-to-seven-employee model with food-safety compliance to federal regulatory and HACCP standards.

What the Project Included

Demand was anchored rather than assumed: a letter of intent from a regional dairy processor (party withheld) commits up to 25 million pounds of bulk cheese annually, with non-member volumes conservatively projected at 2 to 5 million pounds in year one. The ten-year pro forma builds revenue from $3,957,594 toward $5,174,877 across storage fees, handling and ancillary services — shrink wrapping, labeling, cross-docking — and spot-market activity, with discounted cash flow analysis at an eight percent rate supporting the financial feasibility determination.

Capital Structure

Opening long-term debt of $13,353,508 amortizing to $11,542,298 by Year 10 against fixed annual debt service of $1,185,721, with net worth building from $559,629 to $16,816,682 over the ten-year horizon as cash accumulates and principal retires. Property taxes were modeled at full assessment on the $16,000,000 construction basis with no abatement assumed, despite available county incentives.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The structural challenge was concentration: a lean automated staffing model magnifies key-person risk, addressed in the study through cross-training, redundancy in critical roles, and succession planning requirements; and the anchor-supplier relationship concentrates demand, addressed through the conservative non-member volume assumptions and competitive demand analysis for the Amarillo region.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Travel Center & Freight · California · Party Names Withheld

Truck Stop Feasibility Study

Major-Brand Truck Stop · SEC of CA-99 & Shanks Road · Delhi, California · Merced County
Truck stop fuel plaza
Truck Stop Feasibility Study
$13,500,000
Initial Capital Investment (as evaluated)
SBA-Backed Debt
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE — all five determinations affirmative: economic, technical, market, financial, and management
Study Conclusion
DSCR exceeding 4.0x in all projection years; NPV above $16,500,000 at a 9% discount rate
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Proposed development of a major-brand truck stop on a 6-acre parcel at the southeast corner of CA-99 and Shanks Road in Delhi, Merced County — a 4,000-square-foot convenience store with a 4,000-square-foot gasoline canopy and a 3,000-square-foot diesel canopy serving the Golden State Highway truck corridor between the Bay Area and Southern California. Year 1 sales are projected above $61,000,000, growing three percent annually, with total revenues exceeding $60,000,000 at stabilization.

What the Project Included

The market analysis was built on corridor truck-traffic counts along CA-99, a captive and diverse demand base with limited direct competition in the immediate trade area, and seasonality patterns specific to Central Valley freight movement. Fuel gross margins were set at the ten percent industry standard, the technical analysis confirmed soils, grading, and drainage suitable for cost-effective construction, and a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed under CEQA returned no recognized environmental conditions.

Capital Structure

Financing through a combination of equity and long-term SBA-backed debt at a conservative loan-to-value ratio, with annual debt service of $675,000 covered by projected EBITDA at better than 4.0x in every projection year — coverage headroom that holds under the cost-inflation, competition, and margin-compression scenarios tested.

Feasibility Study Challenges

High-revenue, thin-margin fuel retail lives on the margin line, so the sensitivity analysis concentrated there: per-gallon margin reduction scenarios, competitive entry, and economic-cycle stress all left debt service comfortably covered, and no adverse scenario tested threatened the ability to meet obligations. The remaining work identified by the study is execution — finalizing the SBA-backed financing structure and phasing staffing to actual traffic capture as the site ramps.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Marina & Hospitality · New York · Party Names Withheld

Marina Hospitality Feasibility Study

Boutique Marina Hospitality Redevelopment · Main Street waterfront · Catskill, New York · Greene County
Marina waterfront
Marina Hospitality Feasibility Study
$9,300,000
Total Capital Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 7(a) or 504 · SOP 50 10 8
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE within the meaning and intent of SBA program requirements
Study Conclusion
DSCR strengthening from 1.26x to 1.53x over the ten-year projection; NOI rising from $783,899 to $948,634
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Redevelopment of an existing Hudson River waterfront marina site in Catskill, Greene County, into a professionally managed boutique hospitality operation combining upland luxury suites with purpose-built floating lodging units — an integrated, revenue-generating hospitality business rather than a passive real estate investment, intentionally positioned between high-end boutique hotels and experiential lodging. The absence of a full-service restaurant reduces operational complexity, and staffing is structured to comparable boutique benchmarks.

What the Project Included

The floating lodging units are the competitive core: a product type scarce in the regional market and increasingly sought by experiential travelers, centrally owned and managed unlike peer-to-peer floating accommodations. The study evidenced the typology premium from a national comparable set of floating-lodging operators, supporting an ADR adjustment of $150–$250 over land-based equivalents, with phased deployment of additional floating units providing concept scalability. Eligibility screens confirmed compliance with the program’s ineligible-business rules and, where an Eligible Passive Company structure is used, conformance to the applicable operating-control and lease-term requirements.

Capital Structure

A proposed SBA-guaranteed loan of approximately $6,991,250 — roughly 75 percent of total project cost — with the balance funded through borrower equity of approximately $2,308,750. Sources and uses were reviewed to confirm all costs relate directly to the eligible operating business, with no allocation to speculative land holding or passive investment.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The underwriting tension was typology risk against coverage cushion: a floating-lodging product with no direct local comparable had to be priced from national evidence, while early-year DSCR of 1.26x sits closer to program minimums than the stabilized 1.53x — so the ten-year DSCR analysis, marina and waterfront permitting pathway (state environmental and federal dock permitting), and phased capital deployment carried the conditions.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Investment Prospectus · Healthcare · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Ambulatory Surgery Center Feasibility Study

ASC Conversion of a 62,259 SF Medical Office Building · Maitland–Winter Park–Orlando corridor, Florida
Ambulatory surgery center
Ambulatory Surgery Center Feasibility Study
$9,000,000
Total Project Capitalization (as evaluated)
Investment Prospectus · Physician Equity + SBA-Backed Senior Debt
Engagement Framework
CAPITAL FEASIBILITY SUPPORTED — capital durability and debt service capacity affirmed across ramp, stress, and exit scenarios; physician IRRs remain materially positive under downside cases
Study Conclusion
Stabilized capacity of approximately 49,000 procedures annually across up to 30 operating rooms at full buildout; conservative leverage relative to projected cash flow
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Investment prospectus and advanced capital feasibility analysis supporting a physician equity offering for the repurposing and clinical refitting of an existing four-story, 62,259-gross-square-foot medical office building in the Maitland–Winter Park–Orlando corridor into a licensed ambulatory surgery center — among the larger physician-aligned ASC platforms modeled at up to 30 operating rooms and procedure suites at full buildout. The analysis was prepared to the standard of scrutiny applied in private placements under Regulation D and in SBA-financed healthcare transactions.

What the Project Included

The phasing logic drives the economics: Phase I refitting of approximately $5,800,000 activates operating rooms on the first and second floors; Phase II adds capacity to roughly 15–18 active rooms at approximately $2,200,000 — about 24 percent of total capitalization — because core systems and shared clinical infrastructure are already installed; and a final phase brings capacity to the low-to-mid 20s at approximately $1,000,000, with incremental cost per operating room declining materially at each step. Revenue modeling spans payer mix, reimbursement differentials between hospital outpatient departments and ASCs, and an aggregate contractual adjustment of approximately 15 percent.

Capital Structure

Total capitalization of approximately $9,000,000 comprising SBA-backed senior debt of approximately $6,500,000 and physician equity, with leverage intentionally conservative relative to projected cash flow. The waterfall analysis modeled equity raise scenarios, ownership dilution, and distribution timing across operating and exit cases, including the personal-guarantee considerations that attach to SBA-backed financing.

Feasibility Study Challenges

A prospectus for physician investors demands different discipline than a lender study: every return figure had to be presented with its risk counterpart. The analysis therefore separated IRR from equity multiple explicitly — early exits trade total dollars for IRR while long-term holds reverse the trade — stressed the regulatory exposure of Medicare conditions for coverage and state healthcare regulation, and confined downside scenarios to return compression rather than capital impairment or debt stress. The engagement’s purpose was an informed determination of whether the project warrants investment, not a sales document.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Hospitality & Events · South Carolina · Party Names Withheld

Event Venue Feasibility Study

Wedding & Event Venue on 29.6 Acres · Old Clearpond Road · Conway, South Carolina · Horry County
Event venue banquet hall
Event Venue Feasibility Study
$6,400,000
Project Capitalization (as evaluated)
SBA 504 + Conventional
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE — all five determinations affirmative; the financial model exceeds standard benchmarks for profitability, liquidity, and debt service coverage
Study Conclusion
DSCR of 4.5x in Year 2 rising to 9.8x by Year 10 on annual debt service of $451,403; net margins stabilize above 28% from Year 4
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Proposed development of a best-in-class privately owned wedding and event venue on approximately 29.6 acres of gently rolling, well-drained land on Old Clearpond Road in Conway, Horry County — roughly twenty minutes from the Myrtle Beach tourism engine that generates more than 19 million annual visits. Within a 100-mile radius the Myrtle Beach–Conway region hosts over 6,000 major weddings annually plus corporate, nonprofit, and social events, against limited high-quality competitive supply.

What the Project Included

Revenue is diversified across venue rental at approximately 65 percent of total, bar and beverage service at 25 percent, and add-on services at 10 percent, with event counts ramping from 133 in the first full operating year to 290 by Year 10 and total sales building from $3,951,850 to $9,125,000 across the same horizon. The technical analysis confirmed nearly 30 buildable acres with favorable soils, dual ingress and egress, and minimal topographic or environmental encumbrance, and the operating plan was benchmarked against industry data for repayment, liquidity, and profitability.

Capital Structure

A capital stack blending conventional bank and SBA 504 loans with owner equity of approximately 15 percent of the total — satisfying lender and SBA injection requirements — producing total annual debt service of $451,403 beginning after project completion. The opening balance sheet carries $5,450,000 of debt against $950,000 of equity, with the debt-to-equity ratio improving from 5.74 to 1.03 by 2028 as principal retires and earnings accumulate.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Event venues are absorption stories, and the study’s credibility rests on the ramp: the event-count buildout from 133 to 290 annual events was tied to quantified regional demand rather than aspiration, scenario and sensitivity analysis confirmed economic feasibility even under conservative demand projections, and Monte Carlo testing supported the liquidity and ratio profile. Seasonality of coastal South Carolina event demand and the post-pandemic rebound in consumer event spending were modeled explicitly rather than assumed away.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Fuel Retail · Idaho · Party Names Withheld

Gas Station Feasibility Study

Major-Brand Gas Station Expansion · N. 2nd Street East · Mountain Home, Idaho · Elmore County
Gas station and convenience store
Gas Station Feasibility Study
$1,450,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504 · SOP 50 10
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE — financially and operationally feasible and capable of reliably servicing the proposed SBA debt; acceptable for purposes of SBA 504 financing
Study Conclusion
1.73x initial DSCR on the $1,235,000 SBA 504 loan (25-year amortization at an assumed 10.75% rate), improving steadily over the projection period
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility study of a proposed SBA-financed expansion at an established major-brand fuel site in Mountain Home, Elmore County — razing a structure dating to 1962 and constructing a new 2,200-square-foot convenience store to capture inside-sales margin at a location whose fuel business is already proven. Stabilized Year 1 operations are projected at approximately $4,200,000 in revenue and approximately $246,000 of net operating income, confirming that the core business is viable before the expansion premium is counted.

What the Project Included

The budget allocates $1,200,000 to the new convenience store building — 82.8 percent of total project cost, or $545 per square foot — a concentration the study defended explicitly: inside sales, not fuel, generate the majority of gross margin, so directing capital to the dominant revenue driver is the correct underwriting posture. SBA and lender fees of $85,000 represent a conservative 5.9 percent of cost for a multi-party 504 structure, and $120,000 of initial working capital — 8.3 percent — sits inside the five-to-ten percent range lenders treat as reasonable without overcapitalization.

Capital Structure

An SBA 504 loan of $1,235,000 amortized over 25 years at an assumed 10.75 percent interest rate against $1,450,000 of fixed, known, and fully funded project costs, producing annual debt service of approximately $142,582 covered at 1.73x from initial stabilized operations.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The discipline in this study was scale honesty: the pro forma deliberately does not project demand beyond what is feasible within a neighborhood-scale convenience format, the 10.75 percent rate assumption builds in rate stress rather than optimism, and the sensitivity analysis tested whether the business as it exists — not as it might become — sustains the proposed debt. Coverage at 1.73x initial, improving thereafter, answered the question affirmatively under SBA SOP 50 10 underwriting standards.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Highest & Best Use Study · Commercial Land · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Commercial Land Highest & Best Use Study

8.343-Acre Commercial Assemblage · N State Road 19 · Eustis, Florida · Lake County
Commercial development land
Commercial Land Highest & Best Use Study
$1,342,640
Residual Land Value — Concluded Program (54,000 SF)
Highest & Best Use · Multi-Scenario DCF
Engagement Framework
HIGHEST AND BEST USE: a mixed program anchored by medical office and flex space — legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive; grocery rejected as a primary format
Study Conclusion
The concluded 54,000 SF program — 25,000 SF multi-tenant medical office, 25,000 SF flex, 4,000 SF bank pad — yields a residual land value of $1,342,640 with IRR above 15%, more than double the best single-use result; medical office alone yields $630,635 and flex $586,500
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Highest and best use analysis of an 8.343-acre, 363,429-square-foot commercial assemblage fronting N State Road 19 in Eustis, Lake County — a site whose developable footprint is defined by its constraints: 6.054 upland acres suitable for development, two wetland areas totaling approximately 2.3 acres (1.869 and 0.420 acres), and a portion lying within FEMA Flood Zone AE, producing a net buildable envelope estimated at 4.5 to 4.8 acres, or roughly 195,000 square feet after parking and stormwater requirements.

What the Project Included

Each candidate use — medical office, flex space, bank branch, self-storage, urgent care, grocery, and combinations — was run through discounted cash flow modeling with residual land value calculation, terminal value discounting, entrepreneurial profit expectations, and submarket rent evidence averaging approximately $24.70 per square foot. Medical office and flex space emerged as the strongest single uses, bank branches as stabilizers, storage and urgent care as feasible but lower-productivity, and grocery as unsupportable on residual land value as a primary format.

Capital Structure

Twenty single-use scenarios were costed in the feasibility ranking table at total costs of $5,550,000 to $7,550,000 — the highest and best use emerging not from any one of them but from the phased mixed program: Phase 1 delivers the flex space and bank pad for early income and equity recycling at roughly 65% loan-to-cost with a 1.30x DSCR sizing constraint, and Phase 2 delivers the medical office once tenants are secured. Each scenario carried site acquisition, preparation, hard and soft costs, and a twelve percent entrepreneurial profit, so the residual land values compare on a consistent, financeable basis.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Constrained-site HBU work is subtraction before addition: wetlands and the Zone AE floodplain had to be carved out and stormwater compliance engineered before any program could be sized, and only a subset of uses that achieve positive residual land value also produce returns above market expectations — the study’s ranking framework was built to find that intersection. The conclusion is a defensible, supported program identification rather than a single-use bet.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Highest & Best Use Study · Downtown Redevelopment · Idaho · Party Names Withheld

Downtown Parcels Highest & Best Use Study

Three-Parcel Downtown Analysis · N Main Street & N 2nd East · Mountain Home, Idaho · Elmore County
Downtown commercial parcels
Downtown Parcels Highest & Best Use Study
$285,000
Concluded Near-Term Program — Two Parcels ($110,000 + $175,000)
Highest & Best Use · Parcel-Level Reconciliation
Engagement Framework
HIGHEST AND BEST USE concluded per parcel: the two Main Street parcels form a coordinated Main Street–oriented component, while the N 2nd East parcel carries an independent use conclusion — the public alley system treated as a hard boundary, not an assumed assemblage
Study Conclusion
Concluded near-term program of $285,000: $110,000 support parking, circulation, and service improvements on 450 N Main (rank 1) plus a $175,000 pad-ready program on 425 N 2nd East; vertical concepts up to $3,100,000 total project cost were screened per parcel and deferred — capitalized value remains below total project cost for most at current rents. The companion fuel and convenience study’s $1,450,000 program (1.73x DSCR) anchors the ownership’s income
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Highest and best use study of three parcels in downtown Mountain Home held under common ownership — two fronting N Main Street and one fronting N 2nd East — determining, parcel by parcel, the uses that are legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive, both individually and for the ownership viewed as a coordinated but not unified holding. The report explicitly rejects the convenient assumption that proximate parcels on a sketch constitute a seamless development tract.

What the Project Included

The analytical framework treated the public alley system as a real boundary, which reorganized the entire conclusion: the western parcels form the Main Street–oriented retail component while the N 2nd East parcel stands alone with its own use determination, each evaluated on frontage role, parcel geometry, likely tenancy, downtown rent creation, and traffic pattern including the one-way access logic. Scenario testing included a build-ready commercial pad for long-term ground lease against build-to-suit alternatives, compared on land residual, financeability, and equity return under the user’s requested financing assumptions.

Capital Structure

Screening feasibility tables priced every concept per parcel — total project costs from $1,300,000 to $3,100,000 for vertical programs, sized against a 1.30x DSCR maximum loan, equity required, value at an 8% capitalization rate, and land residual — under the ownership’s requested financing assumptions of prime plus a margin. 470 N Main Street, at 14,985 square feet the largest parcel and the strongest long-term vertical opportunity, was concluded as the primary future redevelopment parcel while failing the immediate financial feasibility test for speculative development. The city’s development-incentive ordinance, requiring minimum qualifying investment of not less than $500,000, was factored as a threshold condition rather than a direct abatement.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The hardest part of small-market downtown HBU work is resisting overstatement: a ground-lease benchmark can flatter a parcel’s value while leaving the residual only marginally positive, and the study said so plainly, concluding where the ownership would leave value on the table through fragmented disposition versus coordinated development. The conclusion strengthens downtown identity goals while remaining anchored to what actual market conditions and actual parcel geometry support.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Condominium Development · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Condominium Feasibility Study

184-Unit Class A Condominium Sell-Out · Winter Haven, Florida · Polk County
Condominium building
Condominium Feasibility Study
$48,456,000
Optimized Total Development Cost (as evaluated)
Conventional Lending
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE WITH CONDITIONS — on the restructured 184-unit program; the sponsor’s base-case 170-unit program at $60,250,000 was determined INFEASIBLE as presented
Study Conclusion
Development cost optimization of $11,794,000 between the infeasible base case and the feasible concluded program, with sell-out absorption modeled unit-by-unit
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a Class A condominium sell-out in Winter Haven, Polk County, evaluated for conventional construction lending — an engagement defined by the willingness to reject the program as submitted. The sponsor’s 170-unit base case at $60,250,000 of total development cost failed the feasibility test; the study’s concluded program restructured the project to 184 units at $48,456,000, converting an infeasible submission into a financeable one.

What the Project Included

A full sell-out absorption analysis — unit mix, pricing, monthly absorption pace, and presale thresholds — built into a fully linked financial model alongside the development cost optimization work, with the comparison between base case and concluded program carried through every schedule so the lender could see exactly which cost and program decisions moved the determination.

Capital Structure

Conventional construction financing repaid through unit sell-out proceeds, with the development budget, contingency, and absorption-driven repayment schedule restructured around the 184-unit concluded program.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Independence was the engagement: a feasibility consultant paid to validate a $60,250,000 program instead concluded it infeasible and demonstrated what would be feasible — a larger unit count on a substantially smaller budget. The analytical work sat in the cost optimization (an $11,794,000 reduction in total development cost) and in defending the absorption assumptions that make any condominium sell-out determination credible to a construction lender.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Wellness & Fitness · California · Party Names Withheld

Wellness Center Feasibility Study

51,999 SF Wellness Center · Costa Mesa, California · Orange County
Wellness center building
Wellness Center Feasibility Study
$27,910,000
Total Development Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504 · Construction-to-Permanent
Program / Financing Framework
The capital stack was found feasible within the $20,000,000 loan cap, with the program evaluated across economic, market, operational, and financial feasibility dimensions and the conditions disclosed in the body of the study
Study Conclusion
Stabilization at 4,500 members — a modest capture of the trade-area adult population — at average annual revenue per member of approximately $2,205, producing base-case debt service coverage of 1.25x with rate-stress cases carried in the analysis
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a proposed 51,999-square-foot wellness center in Costa Mesa, Orange County, evaluated for SBA 504 construction-to-permanent financing — a large-format health, fitness, and wellness facility in one of Southern California’s most affluent and health-conscious trade areas.

What the Project Included

Membership-model revenue analysis, trade-area demographics, competitive supply mapping across the Orange County fitness and wellness market, and construction-to-permanent underwriting consistent with SBA 504 requirements for special-purpose recreational property.

Capital Structure

SBA 504 construction-to-permanent structure: senior bank construction loan converting to permanent first mortgage alongside the SBA debenture, with borrower equity injection per program minimums for special-purpose property.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Large-format wellness facilities are special-purpose buildings underwritten on the operating business, not the real estate — so the study’s weight fell on membership absorption, price-point defensibility in a market dense with boutique and big-box competitors, and the construction-period risk inherent in a 51,999-square-foot build carried on a construction-to-permanent structure.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Marina & Resort · Kentucky · Party Names Withheld

Marina Feasibility Study

Full-Service Lake Marina & Resort Operation · Lake Cumberland, Kentucky · Pulaski County
Marina with boat docks
Marina Feasibility Study
$25,000,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
USDA B&I · Instruction 5001
Program / Financing Framework
Evaluated across all five feasibility dimensions required by 7 CFR Part 5001 — economic, market, technical, financial, and management — addressing all 37 factors enumerated in Appendix A to Subpart D, with the cost-benefit synthesis rated FAVORABLE at a net present value of $7,320,000
Study Conclusion
Debt service coverage modeled at 1.42x in Year 1 — 1.31x under conservative Scenario A and 1.49x under Scenario B — with slip occupancy of 88 to 93 percent benchmarked against a supply-constrained market running 85 to 95 percent
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a full-service marina and resort operation on Lake Cumberland — one of the largest reservoirs east of the Mississippi and among the busiest houseboating destinations in the United States — evaluated for a USDA Business & Industry guaranteed loan under Instruction 5001 in a rural Kentucky county where the marina is a primary economic anchor.

What the Project Included

Multi-revenue-stream marina underwriting: wet-slip and dry storage rental, houseboat and watercraft rental fleets, fuel sales, service and repair, ship’s store, and food and beverage — each modeled against lake-level operating constraints, seasonality, and the destination tourism draw of the Lake Cumberland market.

Capital Structure

USDA B&I guaranteed loan structure consistent with Instruction 5001 rural-area eligibility, collateralized by the marina’s real property, improvements, and operating assets.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Marina underwriting on a flood-control reservoir lives with the water level: seasonal drawdowns and multi-year lake-level management decisions directly drive slip utility, rental-fleet season length, and revenue timing, so the analysis had to demonstrate debt service capacity across the operating calendar rather than at a single stabilized point — alongside the concentration risk inherent in a destination market where the asset is both the business and the draw.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Fuel Retail · Washington · Party Names Withheld

Travel Center Feasibility Study

Fuel, Convenience Retail & QSR Travel Center · Interstate 5 corridor · Castle Rock, Washington · Cowlitz County
Travel center plaza
Travel Center Feasibility Study
$14,568,092
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE — the project demonstrates repayment capacity well in excess of SBA program minimums
Study Conclusion
Year 1 DSCR of 3.12x — nearly triple the 1.15x SOP operating floor — underwritten through a 65-tab fully linked financial model carrying 4,087 formulas with zero hardcoded values
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a travel center combining branded fuel, convenience retail, and quick-service restaurant operations on the Interstate 5 corridor at Castle Rock, Cowlitz County — the I-5 gateway between Portland and Seattle traffic and the Mount St. Helens recreation draw — evaluated for SBA 504 financing.

What the Project Included

Component-level revenue modeling across fuel gallons, inside sales, and QSR; corridor traffic capture analysis; and a complete 160-slide study supported by a 65-tab model in which every figure links to the assumptions tab — ten-year pro forma, sensitivity at ±5/10/15 percent, interest-rate stress, and the full ratio suite benchmarked against industry data.

Capital Structure

SBA 504 structure: senior bank first mortgage, CDC debenture, and borrower equity injection, with fixed-asset eligibility and occupancy requirements confirmed under the program rules.

Feasibility Study Challenges

High-coverage deals carry their own analytical burden: a 3.12x Year 1 DSCR invites the question of whether the revenue model is too optimistic, so the study’s work was defending the fuel-volume and inside-sales assumptions against corridor traffic data and industry benchmarks — proving the coverage was earned by the site, not assumed by the model. Margin compression and competitive-entry scenarios left repayment capacity intact in every case tested.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Hospitality & Viticulture · California · Party Names Withheld

Winery Event Venue Feasibility Study

Luxury Wedding & Event Venue with 9-Key Boutique Hotel · Temecula Valley wine country, California · Riverside County
Winery and event venue
Winery Event Venue Feasibility Study
$10,066,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504 / 7(a)
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE WITH CONDITIONS — the single highest-priority condition being resolution of the site’s one-lane unpaved access road
Study Conclusion
A 39-tab fully linked financial model carrying 2,718 formulas with zero formula errors, supporting a 101-slide study across the venue and lodging revenue stack
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a 17,771-square-foot luxury wedding and event venue with a 9-key boutique hotel in the Temecula Valley wine country — Southern California’s premier viticultural destination market — evaluated for SBA 504/7(a) financing on behalf of the lender and certified development company.

What the Project Included

A dual-revenue hospitality model: high-margin wedding and event bookings anchored by the wine-country destination draw, with the boutique hotel keys capturing event-driven room nights and smoothing midweek utilization. Demand was benchmarked against the regional wedding market, venue comparables, and ADR evidence from the Temecula Valley lodging set.

Capital Structure

Blended SBA 504/7(a) structure: senior bank financing, CDC debenture against the eligible fixed assets, and borrower equity injection consistent with special-purpose hospitality property requirements.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The study’s defining finding was physical, not financial: primary access runs over a one-lane unpaved road, and the analysis flagged it as the highest-priority conditional item — a constraint bearing on guest experience, emergency access, weather resilience, and ultimately the premium pricing the pro forma depends on. The determination was structured so the access condition had to be resolved before the otherwise favorable economics could be relied upon.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Outdoor Hospitality · Texas · Party Names Withheld

RV Resort Feasibility Study

100-Site Destination RV Resort on 55 Acres · Van, Texas · Van Zandt County · I-20 corridor
RV resort campground
RV Resort Feasibility Study
$4,839,570
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504 · SOP 50 10 8
Program / Financing Framework
FAVORABLE WITH CONDITIONS — twenty-three enumerated conditions precedent
Study Conclusion
Year 3 DSCR of 2.758x; loan-to-value of 34.8% against an indicated value of $11,116,839 — more than double total project cost
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a 100-site destination RV resort on 55 acres in Van Zandt County on the Interstate 20 corridor east of Dallas, evaluated for SBA 504 financing under SOP 50 10 8 — a ground-up outdoor hospitality development positioned for the East Texas leisure-travel and long-stay markets.

What the Project Included

Site-by-site revenue modeling across transient, weekly, and extended-stay segments; capture-rate and leakage analysis quantifying the trade-area demand the resort can realistically absorb; and a complete 242-slide study with rebuilt global pagination, supported by a fully linked financial model through the standard sensitivity, rate-stress, and ratio suite.

Capital Structure

SBA 504 structure: senior bank first mortgage, CDC debenture, and borrower equity injection, with the indicated value of $11,116,839 producing a 34.8 percent loan-to-value — a collateral cushion rarely seen in ground-up hospitality.

Feasibility Study Challenges

A favorable determination carrying twenty-three conditions precedent is a determination that does its job: the economics cleared comfortably — 2.758x Year 3 coverage on conservative absorption — but ground-up RV development stands or falls on execution items, so the conditions enumerated the permitting, utility, construction, and operational prerequisites one by one rather than waving at them. The capture-rate work carried the market case, tying projected occupancy to quantified regional RV demand rather than industry averages.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Retail Development · Missouri · Party Names Withheld

Retail Development Feasibility Study

7,200 SF Dual-Tenant Retail Building · Grain Valley, Missouri · Jackson County · I-70 corridor, Kansas City MSA
Retail shopping center
Retail Development Feasibility Study
$3,659,200
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504
Program / Financing Framework
FEASIBLE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
Study Conclusion
Dual-tenant income structure — an owner-operated wine and spirits retailer paired with a national-franchise quick-service tenant — underwritten through a 271-slide master study
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a 7,200-square-foot dual-tenant retail building in Grain Valley, Jackson County — a fast-growing Interstate 70 suburb on the eastern edge of the Kansas City metropolitan area — evaluated for SBA 504 financing. The program pairs an owner-operated wine and spirits store with a national-franchise quick-service food tenant in a single new-construction building.

What the Project Included

Trade-area demand analysis for both retail formats, franchise-system underwriting for the quick-service component, construction and equipment budgeting carried at line-item level, and a 271-slide master study assembled with full cross-referencing between the ownership structure, square-footage program, and financial schedules.

Capital Structure

SBA 504 structure: senior bank first mortgage, CDC debenture, and borrower equity injection, with the equipment budget for both tenant spaces carried inside the eligible project cost basis.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Two businesses under one roof and one loan means every inconsistency compounds: the engagement included a dedicated consistency revision pass reconciling the ownership structure, standardizing the square-footage program across every schedule, aligning the equipment budget, and incorporating the franchisor’s multi-unit approval language as a documented condition — the unglamorous work that determines whether a study survives lender and SBA review without exception items.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Tribal Economic Development · Nevada · Party Names Withheld

Tribal Travel Center Feasibility Study

Highway Travel Center: Fuel, Convenience, QSR & Retail Strip · US-50 corridor · Mound House, Nevada · Lyon County
Tribal travel center
Tribal Travel Center Feasibility Study
$3,969,648
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
Component Financing · Tribal Section 17
Program / Financing Framework
Both financed components were evaluated as independently serviceable under the Section 17 tribal corporate structure — the fuel and convenience component at 8.38x standalone coverage and the retail strip at 1.50x — with the sovereign tax position carried in the base case rather than as upside
Study Conclusion
Component-level underwriting: the gas station and convenience component carries a standalone DSCR of 8.38x and the retail strip 1.50x, each financeable on its own coverage
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a highway travel center — branded fuel, convenience store, quick-service restaurant, and a multi-tenant retail strip — on the US-50 corridor at Mound House, sponsored by a tribal Section 17 federal corporation, with the financing structured at the component level so each income stream is underwritten on its own merits.

What the Project Included

A 170-slide study with 27 appendix exhibits, supported by a 57-tab fully linked model carrying 3,696 formulas, in which eight tribal sovereign tax exemptions are embedded directly in the base-case operating economics — fuel excise, sales, and property tax positions that materially alter both the margin structure and the competitive posture against off-reservation operators.

Capital Structure

Component financing: the fuel and convenience component and the retail strip are sized, collateralized, and covenanted separately, allowing the lender to advance against the 8.38x-coverage fuel business without cross-subsidizing the slower-stabilizing retail strip at 1.50x.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Tribal sovereign structures demand underwriting discipline in both directions: the eight tax exemptions are real economic advantages that belong in the base case, but each had to be documented to its legal source so the lender relies on established sovereign positions rather than assumptions — and the Section 17 corporate structure required the analysis to address sovereign immunity, waiver scope, and collateral enforceability head-on, the questions every lender to Indian Country asks first.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Outdoor Hospitality · Florida · Party Names Withheld

Waterfront RV Resort Feasibility Study

34-Site Waterfront RV Resort · Navarre, Florida · Santa Rosa County · Gulf Coast
Waterfront RV resort
Waterfront RV Resort Feasibility Study
$8,050,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 504
Program / Financing Framework
Conditionally favorable — subject to adoption of the recommended site plan configuration, an increase in working capital reserves to $350,000, and conversion to a fixed interest rate at closing
Study Conclusion
Year 5 DSCR of 1.20x on the recommended configuration, against the 1.15x SBA operating minimum — the only evaluated site plan achieving compliance within the five-year underwriting window. DCF land residual of $2,777,416 exceeds the $1,750,000 acquisition cost by $1,027,416
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a 34-site waterfront RV resort at Navarre on Florida’s Emerald Coast — between Pensacola Beach and Destin in one of the Gulf’s strongest beach-tourism corridors — evaluated for SBA 504 financing. Direct water frontage positions the property at the premium end of the regional RV market.

What the Project Included

Small-site premium-rate underwriting: with only 34 sites, the revenue case rests on rate rather than volume, so the analysis benchmarked nightly and seasonal rates against the waterfront RV comparable set, modeled the Gulf Coast seasonality curve, and quantified the snowbird long-stay segment that carries shoulder-season occupancy.

Capital Structure

SBA 504 structure: senior bank first mortgage, CDC debenture, and borrower equity injection consistent with special-purpose outdoor-hospitality property requirements.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Coastal Florida underwriting starts with wind and water: flood-zone determination, named-storm insurance cost and availability, and elevation requirements bear directly on both the development budget and the operating expense load, and a 34-site property has no scale to absorb surprises — so the study’s discipline was in the expense side and the downside cases as much as the premium-rate revenue argument.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Sports & Recreation · Texas · Party Names Withheld

Pickleball Clubhouse Feasibility Study

Pickleball Clubhouse & Social Venue · Buda, Texas · Hays County · Austin MSA
Pickleball clubhouse
Pickleball Clubhouse Feasibility Study
$4,840,000
Total Project Cost (as evaluated)
SBA 7(a) / 504
Program / Financing Framework
Favorable, with the dedicated General Manager hire recommended as a condition of the determination
Study Conclusion
Year 1 DSCR of 1.97x at 60% loan-to-cost — sponsor equity of $1,936,000 (40% of total project cost) is four times the SBA SOP 50 10 8 minimum injection for startup businesses
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Feasibility analysis of a pickleball clubhouse and social venue in Buda, Hays County — on the fast-growing southern edge of the Austin metropolitan area — evaluated for SBA 7(a)/504 financing. The concept pairs dedicated court play with a club-format social, food, and beverage operation, positioning the venue as a membership destination rather than a court-rental commodity.

What the Project Included

Membership and programming revenue modeling across leagues, open play, lessons, and events, with the social and beverage operation underwritten as a margin driver in its own right; trade-area demographics for the Austin MSA’s southern growth corridor; and competitive mapping of the regional indoor and outdoor court supply.

Capital Structure

SBA 7(a)/504 structure sized to the real-estate and equipment program, with borrower equity injection per program requirements for special-purpose recreational property.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Early-cycle recreation concepts carry category risk in both directions — explosive participation growth against an unproven local revenue model — so the underwriting question was whether the membership and social-spend assumptions would hold once the novelty curve flattens, answered through conservative ramp assumptions and benchmarking against the operating clubs that preceded this market.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Highest & Best Use Study · California · Party Names Withheld

Commercial Corridor Highest & Best Use Study

East Colorado Boulevard corridor · Pasadena, California · Los Angeles County
Commercial corridor
Commercial Corridor Highest & Best Use Study
$45,018,730
Total Project Cost — Concluded Scenario
Appraisal Institute Four-Test Framework
Engagement Framework
The concluded scenario was identified as the highest and best use of the site among four candidate development programs, each tested sequentially for legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximal productivity
Study Conclusion
12.2 percent levered IRR, 3.16x equity multiple, and a 22.4 percent profit margin on approximately $45.0 million total project cost, supported by local recent land sales
Key Underwriting Metric
Engagement Summary

A consulting engagement commissioned in March 2026 to determine the highest and best use of a commercial parcel on East Colorado Boulevard in Pasadena. Four candidate development scenarios were modeled in full and ranked under the Appraisal Institute four-test sequential framework. The study is a consulting work product prepared under that framework; it is not an appraisal and renders no opinion of value.

Analytical Approach

Each scenario carried its own development budget, absorption schedule, financing structure, and return stack, with the concluded program differentiated on levered internal rate of return, equity multiple, and profit margin rather than on gross value alone. Conclusions were benchmarked against recent land sales in the corridor so that the residual implied by the concluded use is observable in the local market rather than purely model-derived.

Why It Matters to a Lender

A highest and best use determination of this kind gives a construction or bridge lender an independent, scenario-tested basis for the use assumption embedded in any subsequent appraisal — the analysis demonstrates not only that the concluded program is feasible, but that the competing programs are inferior and by how much.

Underwriting Perspective

The differentiation between scenarios was driven by structural factors — density achievable under the corridor zoning, parking ratios, and the cost-to-revenue relationship of each program — rather than by aggressive rent or pricing assumptions, which were held to market evidence across all four models.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Agricultural Processing · Texas · USDA B&I · Party Names Withheld

Sugar Refinery Restoration Feasibility Study

Santa Rosa, Texas · Rio Grande Valley · Cameron County
Sugar refinery facility
Sugar Refinery Restoration Feasibility Study
$38,110,000
Total Capitalization (as evaluated)
USDA B&I · RD Instruction 5001
Program / Financing Framework
The restoration program was evaluated across the economic, market, technical, financial, and management dimensions required under RD Instruction 5001
Study Conclusion
Capitalization of $38,110,000 comprising $25,000,000 of USDA Business & Industry guaranteed debt and $13,110,000 of sponsor equity — equity of approximately 34 percent of total capitalization
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Restoration of an idle sugar refinery in Santa Rosa, Texas to full production through infrastructure rehabilitation, modernization, and recommissioning. The property includes approximately 359,000 square feet of industrial buildings, warehouses, processing facilities, and cane yards together with supporting utility infrastructure. At design capacity the facility processes approximately 2.05 million tons of cane annually, equivalent to roughly 246,000 tons of refined sugar.

Market Position

The refinery’s Rio Grande Valley location provides dual-market access: the Texas market, which consumes more than 500,000 tons of refined sugar annually, and the established refining corridor served by Louisiana and Florida producers located far from the border. This dual access materially enhances revenue stability relative to a single-market processor and underpinned the demand analysis.

Capital Structure

Total capitalization of $38,110,000, funded by $25,000,000 of USDA Business & Industry guaranteed debt and $13,110,000 of equity provided by aligned sponsors. The structure places roughly one-third of the capitalization in equity ahead of the guaranteed facility, consistent with the tangible-balance-sheet expectations of RD Instruction 5001.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Restoring a dormant heavy-processing asset concentrates risk in the technical dimension: rehabilitation scope, commissioning schedule, and cane supply contracting all had to be evidenced rather than assumed. The analysis therefore weighted contractor capability, equipment condition, and grower-supply arrangements alongside the financial projections, and stated each dependency plainly as a condition of the program rather than absorbing it into base-case assumptions.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Highest & Best Use Study · California · Party Names Withheld

Car Wash & Pad Highest & Best Use Study

North Central Avenue corridor · Chino, California · San Bernardino County
Car wash facility
Car Wash & Pad Highest & Best Use Study
$9,300,000
Concluded-Use Total Development Cost
HBU Consulting · Land Residual Analysis
Engagement Framework
The branded express tunnel car wash with national drive-through ground-lease pad was concluded as the maximally productive use — legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and producing the highest land residual of the uses tested
Study Conclusion
Concluded use: stabilized NOI of approximately $1,550,000 at an 8.00 percent capitalization rate, an indicated stabilized value of approximately $19,375,000 against $9,300,000 of development cost, and an implied land residual of approximately 85 percent of total value
Key Underwriting Metric
Engagement Summary

A highest and best use study of a commercial corridor parcel in Chino, California, evaluated under the four required tests of legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximal productivity. The candidate uses screened included retail-only development, mixed-use development, a gasoline station with ground-lease pad, and an express tunnel car wash with ground-lease pad, in both branded and unbranded configurations.

Residual Analysis

A land residual indications grid was constructed for each feasible use, deriving stabilized net operating income, applying market capitalization rates, and netting total development cost to an implied land residual. Retail-only development produced a comparatively low residual; mixed-use development at approximately $38 million of cost did not support land value at current cost and rent levels; the gasoline alternative performed strongly but carries environmental and fuel-margin volatility; and the branded car wash plus pad configuration produced the highest residual of the set.

Concluded Use

The branded express tunnel car wash integrated with a national drive-through ground-lease pad demonstrated strong capital efficiency, balanced active and passive income, a manageable stabilization timeline, and favorable financing capacity — the configuration that generates the most value relative to cost among the tested programs. A corridor car wash saturation analysis was performed to confirm depth of unmet demand before the use was concluded.

Feasibility Study Challenges

The discipline of the engagement lay in keeping the screening honest: each alternative was carried through the full four-test sequence rather than eliminated early, so that the conclusion rests on a complete comparative record — including the finding that a financially feasible use (the gas station alternative) is nonetheless not maximally productive once environmental exposure and margin volatility are priced.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Aviation Services · West Virginia · Party Names Withheld

Aviation Services Expansion Feasibility Study

North Central West Virginia Airport · Bridgeport, West Virginia · Harrison County
Aviation services hangar
Aviation Services Expansion Feasibility Study
$9,201,736
Total Phase II Project Cost
Independent Feasibility Study
Program / Financing Framework
The Phase II expansion was evaluated as the continuation and completion of an already functioning aviation-services platform rather than a speculative start-up
Study Conclusion
Underwriting anchored to an existing operating platform: incumbent market position, contracted customer base, and revenue concentration were analyzed alongside a ten-year pro forma and annual debt service coverage schedule
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

A Phase II hangar and aviation-services expansion at North Central West Virginia Airport in Bridgeport, West Virginia, with a total Phase II project cost of $9,201,736. The expansion completes an established maintenance, repair, and aviation-services operation, adding hangar capacity to a platform already generating revenue under existing contracts.

Operating Platform

The analysis treated the incumbent operation as the central underwriting fact: existing customer relationships, contract coverage, and demonstrated execution capability materially de-risk the expansion relative to greenfield aviation projects. Customer base, contracts, and revenue concentration were examined explicitly, including the dependency profile created by anchor relationships.

Execution Review

Contractor capability, materials, and labor availability were reviewed against the construction plan and budget, with fire-protection scope and identified contractor records examined as part of the technical record. The plans and budget were found to be actionable as presented, with the conditions disclosed in the body of the study.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Aviation-services expansions concentrate two risks the study had to weigh against the platform’s incumbency: revenue concentration in a contracted customer base, and the schedule sensitivity of hangar construction at an operating airfield. Both were stated plainly and carried into the coverage analysis rather than netted away.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Education · Colorado · Party Names Withheld

Private Montessori School Feasibility Study

Avon / Edwards, Colorado · Vail Valley · Eagle County
Private school building
Private Montessori School Feasibility Study
$8,800,000
Total Project Cost
Independent Feasibility Study
Program / Financing Framework
The school’s development program and enrollment ramp were evaluated against the Vail Valley’s demographic and employer base
Study Conclusion
At 120-student capacity the program generates total tuition revenue of $3,435,000 against total operating costs of $2,611,220 — an operating margin of approximately 24 percent before debt service; the budget contemplates approximately 69 percent debt ($6,100,000) within the $8,800,000 program
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Development of a private Montessori school serving 120 students in the Avon and Edwards communities of Colorado’s Vail Valley, with a total project cost of $8,800,000. The program serves a resort-economy labor market in which year-round professional families face acute shortages of high-quality early and primary education capacity.

Demand Evidence

Enrollment demand was evidenced through the mechanisms that matter in a capacity-constrained market: waitlists with families paying deposits to secure future access, and employer partnerships with major Vail Valley employers for whom education capacity is a workforce-retention issue. Favorable demographic and economic conditions in Eagle County supported the tuition assumptions underlying the revenue model.

Financial Structure

At capacity, tuition revenue of $3,435,000 against operating costs of $2,611,220 produces an operating cushion sufficient to service the contemplated debt of approximately $6,100,000 — 69 percent of the program — with the balance funded as equity. The ramp to full enrollment, rather than stabilized operations, is where the coverage analysis concentrated its attention.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Private-school feasibility turns on the enrollment ramp: tuition revenue arrives per enrolled student while costs are substantially fixed from opening day. The study therefore tested the early-year gap between staffed capacity and actual enrollment, and treated the waitlist and employer-partnership evidence as the principal mitigant to ramp risk rather than assuming capacity from the first term.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Retail · Georgia · Party Names Withheld

Large-Format Liquor Retail Feasibility Study

Doraville, Georgia · DeKalb County · Atlanta metro
Large-format liquor retail
Large-Format Liquor Retail Feasibility Study
$8,084,744
Construction Budget (lump sum, as evaluated)
Independent Feasibility Study
Program / Financing Framework
The development program and trade-area demand were evaluated for a large-format retail operation; projected stabilized value exceeded total project costs by 121 percent in the analysis
Study Conclusion
Total development cost of $404 per square foot inclusive of land, soft costs, furniture, fixtures, equipment, and working capital; Monte Carlo simulation validated the robustness of the projections
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Development of a large-format liquor retail operation in Doraville, Georgia — a 32,829 square foot building with construction budgeted at $8,084,744 under a lump-sum contract. Total development cost equates to $404 per square foot inclusive of land, soft costs, furniture, fixtures, equipment, and working capital.

Trade Area

The Doraville location sits in a dense, demographically favorable section of the Atlanta metro: the analysis cited a favorable age distribution and favorable demographics within the one-mile and broader trade rings, alongside favorable distributor credit terms supporting inventory economics at large-format scale.

Financial Findings

The projections indicated stabilized performance exceeding total project costs by 121 percent, with Monte Carlo simulation applied to validate the robustness of that margin across simultaneous variations in revenue, margin, and cost inputs — the dispersion analysis rather than the point estimate carrying the conclusion.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Large-format beverage retail concentrates risk in two places the study addressed directly: licensing — a binary regulatory gate that no financial cushion can substitute for — and inventory-carry economics, where distributor terms and turn rates determine working-capital adequacy. Both were stated as explicit dependencies of the program.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Car Wash · California · SBA 504 · Party Names Withheld

Express Car Wash Feasibility Study

West Main Street · Alhambra, California · Los Angeles County
Express car wash
Express Car Wash Feasibility Study
$7,480,000
Total Project Cost
SBA 504 · SOP 50 10 8
Program / Financing Framework
The express car wash development was evaluated for SBA 504 financing on a primary arterial corridor with favorable demographics and a favorable competitive position within its primary trade area
Study Conclusion
Total development budget of approximately $7,480,000 financed under the SBA 504 structure: a $3,225,000 first-position bank loan, an SBA debenture, and a $1,289,000 borrower equity injection, with fixed 25-year amortizations
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Ground-up development of an express tunnel car wash at 2424 West Main Street in Alhambra, California, in the heart of a primary arterial retail corridor. The total development budget of approximately $7,480,000 is financed under the SBA 504 program through a $3,225,000 bank loan in first position, an SBA debenture, and a $1,289,000 borrower equity injection on fixed 25-year amortizations.

Market Position

The site’s trade area presents favorable demographics within the primary ring and a favorable competitive position: the analysis examined corridor traffic, membership-model penetration achievable at the location, and alignment with the industry’s documented success factors for express-tunnel operations in dense Southern California submarkets.

Entitlement Record

Drawings and conditional use permit approvals formed part of the evaluated record, placing the project beyond the entitlement-risk stage that defeats many car wash developments in California jurisdictions and allowing the construction budget to be assessed against an approved scope.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Express car wash underwriting in Southern California turns on saturation: membership economics are strong until a competitor opens inside the drive-time ring. The competitive analysis therefore mapped existing and pipeline tunnels within the trade area, and the coverage analysis was tested against membership-penetration assumptions held below the levels achieved by mature comparable sites.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Airport Parking · Texas · Party Names Withheld

Airport Parking Facility Feasibility Study

Humble, Texas · serving George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) · Harris County
Airport parking facility
Airport Parking Facility Feasibility Study
$4,600,000
Total Project Cost
Independent Feasibility Study
Program / Financing Framework
The off-airport parking facility was evaluated against the IAH parking market, including a competitor land-area, capacity, and density analysis
Study Conclusion
Total project cost of $4,600,000 evaluated with a competitor capacity-and-density table, monthly operating and cash flow summaries, discounted cash flow analysis, and sensitivity testing — structured to give lenders comfort on initial operating risk
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Development of an off-airport parking facility in Humble, Texas serving George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH), with a total project cost of $4,600,000. Off-airport parking is a yield business: the facility competes on price, shuttle convenience, and security against both on-airport garages and established off-airport operators.

Competitive Analysis

The study constructed a competitor table covering land area, capacity, and density for the existing IAH off-airport parking set, locating the subject’s capacity within the observed market rather than against abstract benchmarks. Zoning, land use, and regulatory compliance were reviewed alongside construction cost validation and schedule.

Financial Analysis

Monthly operating and cash flow summaries carried the early operating period, with discounted cash flow analysis and sensitivity testing applied over the projection horizon. The structure of the analysis was designed to address the question lenders ask of parking assets: how long the ramp to stabilized occupancy runs and what coverage looks like during it.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Airport parking demand is a derived demand — it moves with enplanements, airline scheduling, and ride-share substitution, none of which the operator controls. The analysis treated ride-share penetration and on-airport capacity pricing as the principal structural risks and tested the pro forma against adverse movements in both.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Feasibility Study · Event Venue · Pennsylvania · Party Names Withheld

Historic Wedding & Event Venue Feasibility Study

Reading, Pennsylvania · Berks County
Historic wedding and event venue
Historic Wedding & Event Venue Feasibility Study
$1,500,000
Evaluated Loan Facility
Independent Feasibility Study
Program / Financing Framework
The renovation and reopening program was found to be appropriately sized, with total project cost confirmed as modest relative to the scale, capacity, and income-generating potential of the asset
Study Conclusion
Stabilized net operating income of approximately $441,000 against annual debt service of approximately $127,000 — debt service coverage exceeding 3.4x on a $1,500,000 loan at 7.00 percent fixed, 25-year amortization, seven-year term
Key Underwriting Metric
Project Summary

Acquisition, renovation, and reopening of a historically significant structure in Reading, Pennsylvania as a wedding and special events venue. The $250,000 acquisition basis is the project’s defining economic fact: combined with renovation-focused capital deployment, it produces a cost-to-income relationship that materially strengthens feasibility, with capital allocated to revenue-enabling improvements, regulatory compliance, and operational readiness rather than speculative enhancements.

Financial Performance

At stabilization the venue is projected to generate approximately $441,000 in annual net operating income against annual debt service of approximately $127,000 — coverage exceeding 3.4x, evaluated on the full 25-year amortization schedule consistent with standard underwriting practice even though the stated loan term is seven years. A 42 percent EBITDA margin provides substantial cushion, and expenses are structured to scale with event volume, contracting during lower-volume periods.

Capital Discipline

The financing structure — a $1,500,000 fully amortizing facility at 7.00 percent fixed — aligns with the economic life of the improvements and the durability of event demand. Working capital and a conservatively sized contingency allowance are carried inside the project cost, reducing reliance on short-term borrowing or owner contributions during early operations.

Feasibility Study Challenges

Reopening a dormant historic asset places execution risk in the renovation scope: rehabilitating older buildings carries inherent uncertainty that the contingency must absorb without funding scope expansion. The early operating years also demand management accountability, consistency, and responsiveness before the booking pipeline matures — both risks were stated plainly and carried as the program’s principal conditions.

Project Location
Map shows the project vicinity for context. Exact parcel identification is withheld where required by engagement confidentiality.
This brief summarizes an independent feasibility engagement. Party names are withheld and details are limited consistent with the confidential nature of underwriting and capital advisory work. Figures represent the project as evaluated at the study date. Fiduciary duty in all engagements runs to the lender and applicable agency.
Secure Client Portal

Your study. Your model. Your project files. One sign-in.

Confidential · Server-Enforced Access · Per-Engagement Isolation
Portal Login

Access Your Project Portal

Sign in to view your confidential feasibility study, financial model, and research documentation — and to upload your own project files directly to your engagement folder. Each client portal is restricted to its own engagement, enforced on the server. It is a live workspace, not a static report — update your model and watch the feasibility results refresh, with 24/7 project monitoring. See everything included →
Sign In to the Secure Client Portal →
— or preview the demo below —
DEMO MODE. Username: Test   Password: Dontest. This demo checks the login in your browser so you can try the flow; it is not production-secure. The live portal above verifies passwords on the server (bcrypt) and enforces per-client file access, downloads, and uploads in PHP.
Incorrect username or password. Try Test / Dontest.
New client? Access is provisioned by Wert-Berater when your engagement begins. Contact +1 310-857-2443 ext. 800 or email.   Project management remains on our Intervals login.
Upload Project Documents
Accepted: PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, images, ZIP. For files over 25 MB, request portal access instead.
Confidentiality Statement. All documents transmitted to Wert-Berater, Inc. are received and held in strict confidence. Materials are used solely to evaluate and prepare the independent feasibility analysis for which they are provided, are accessible only to the assigned analytical team, and are never published, shared with third parties, or disclosed outside the engagement except to the lender, CDC, or federal agency to which our fiduciary duty runs — or as required by law. Files transfer to a private, access-controlled inbox that is not publicly readable. A mutual non-disclosure agreement is available on request prior to any submission.
Signed in
Frequently Asked Questions Feasibility study consultants · SBA · USDA · EB-5

What is a feasibility study consultant?

A feasibility study consultant prepares an independent analysis of whether a proposed project is economically viable and capable of supporting its financing. Wert-Berater, Inc. has served as feasibility study consultants since 1998 for SBA, USDA, EB-5, conventional, and institutional financing, with fiduciary duty to the lender and agency rather than the borrower.

What does an SBA feasibility study require?

An SBA feasibility study under SOP 50 10 8 covers market feasibility, financial feasibility, and a complete project financial model, with debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. It is required for new businesses, changes of ownership, or at lender discretion.

How much does a feasibility study cost?

Fees scale with the lending program, asset class, capital-structure complexity, and data readiness, and are quoted per engagement after a brief qualification call. Across 4,000+ engagements since 1998, the study fee has typically represented a small fraction of one percent of total project cost — while determining whether the rest gets funded. What drives the cost →

What is a USDA feasibility study?

A USDA feasibility study is an independent analysis prepared under RD Staff Instruction 5001 for USDA Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and VAPG programs, documenting market demand, technical viability, management capacity, and financial sustainability for Rural Development review.

How many feasibility studies has Wert-Berater completed?

Since 1998, Wert-Berater, Inc. has completed 3,955 feasibility studies supporting capital allocation decisions — including 1,280 SBA feasibility studies accepted by lenders and 817 USDA feasibility studies reviewed in agency financing — evaluating more than $40.2 billion in project value.

How long does a feasibility study take?

Standard studies are completed in 10 to 15 business days from receipt of complete project data; complex or international assignments may require 20 to 25 business days. Lenders sequencing the study early in the application — rather than after underwriting raises the question — routinely save weeks of loan-cycle time. When SOP 50 10 8 requires a study →

Wert-Berater, Inc.  ·  1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651  ·  111 Town Square Pl Ste 1238 PMB 657834, Jersey City, NJ 07310  ·  539 W. Commerce St #8486, Dallas, TX 75208  ·  +1 310-857-2443 ext. 800  ·  email  ·  email  ·  www.wert-berater.com  ·  Site Map — Feasibility Studies by Project Type  ·  Feasibility Study Blog  ·  Privacy  ·  Terms  ·  Staff Log In  ·  4,000+ engagements since 1998  ·  Global practice  ·  Fiduciary: Lender & Agency  ·  Independence non-negotiable