Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Manufacturing feasibility joins market demand to production economics. The study establishes demand for the plant's output — contracted, identified, or market-derived — then tests the production model: capacity and utilization ramp, input cost structure, labor availability at the required skill level, and the capital budget against industry benchmarks. Dairy plants are analyzed on milkshed supply, federal-order pricing exposure, product-mix economics between fluid, cheese, and value-added lines, and the cold-chain distribution radius the product class permits. Because USDA and SBA reviewers read manufacturing studies against job-creation and rural-impact criteria as well as repayment, the study documents employment, wage levels, and local economic effect to the standard the program requires.
Methodology combines industry production and pricing data, federal milk marketing order statistics, RSMeans location-adjusted facility budgets, BLS occupational wage data for the staffing model, and RMA and IBISWorld operating benchmarks. The financial model carries the utilization ramp, input-cost sensitivity, and program coverage tests across the firm's standard stress discipline, with every assumption sourced.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. Manufacturing reaches us predominantly through USDA B&I — where rural plant economics and job creation align with program purpose — alongside SBA 504 for owner-occupied facilities and conventional lending; Value-Added Producer Grant studies are prepared to 7 CFR Part 5001 where agricultural producers integrate forward into processing.
The firm's manufacturing and processing record spans USDA B&I and SBA engagements nationwide, including refrigerated and cold storage feasibility analysis, food-system, and industrial projects; manufacturing studies are prepared with the same fully linked financial models and stress discipline as every Wert-Berater engagement. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
A dairy processing feasibility study addresses the full arc from raw milk supply through finished-product distribution. The scope is not limited to the financial model; it encompasses the physical plant, the regulatory pathway, the labor market, and the competitive position of the product mix before a single pro forma line is built. Lenders and agency reviewers expect each element to be documented with sourced evidence, not asserted.
Demand analysis for a dairy processing plant differs materially from retail or hospitality demand work because the relevant market is defined by perishability, cold-chain reach, and buyer concentration rather than population density alone. The study builds demand from the buyer side first, then tests whether the plant's output can be absorbed at the price and volume the financial model requires.
Contracted offtake agreements, letters of intent, and distributor commitments are reviewed and characterized by term, volume, and pricing mechanism. Where contracts do not cover full utilization, the study identifies the incremental market: regional grocery distribution networks, food-service accounts, co-manufacturing relationships, or commodity-channel sales through the relevant federal marketing order pool. Each channel carries a different margin profile and a different price-risk exposure, and the model reflects that distinction.
Competitive supply is mapped through state dairy plant licensing registries, USDA Agricultural Marketing Service plant directories, and federal milk marketing order statistical releases, which report pooled volume by plant and by class. Trade association data from organizations such as IDFA and NMPF supplement federal statistics on capacity utilization and product-category trends. Distribution radius constraints are established by product class — fluid milk operates under a tighter radius than aged cheese or shelf-stable powder — and the competitive analysis is bounded accordingly. No demand figure in the study is asserted without a traceable source.
Four inputs account for the majority of coverage-ratio movement in a dairy processing feasibility study. Each is tested across the firm's standard sensitivity discipline, and the narrative explains the directional effect of each assumption so a reviewer can follow the logic without re-running the model.
Every assumption is sourced; none is hardcoded in the model.
SBA, USDA, and conventional lenders each bring a distinct review lens to a dairy processing project, and a study prepared for one program without accounting for the others creates exceptions that slow or defeat credit approval.
Under SBA SOP 50 10 8, the primary concern is global debt-service coverage at 1.00x and operating coverage at 1.15x across the stress scenarios the SOP requires. For a dairy plant, the SBA reviewer will scrutinize the utilization ramp, the basis for contracted revenue, and whether the milk-cost assumption reflects realistic over-order premiums rather than minimum blend prices. Owner-occupied processing facilities financed through SBA 504 are common, and the study must address collateral adequacy alongside repayment.
USDA Business & Industry reviewers apply 7 CFR Part 5001 and weight rural employment creation and economic impact alongside repayment capacity. The study documents job count, wage levels relative to the county median, and the multiplier effect on the local agricultural supply chain — all elements the agency requires in its credit memorandum. Value-Added Producer Grant applications require a separate feasibility determination that the processing enterprise is viable as a stand-alone business, not merely as an extension of the farm operation.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and focus on collateral liquidation value for specialized food-processing equipment, which carries a narrower secondary market than general industrial machinery. The study addresses that distinction directly.
The fee for a dairy processing feasibility study is fixed and quoted in writing within one business day of inquiry. No fee is contingent on the finding, and the determination is not revised because a sponsor or lender prefers a different conclusion. That structure is the foundation of the independence that makes the study usable by a reviewing agency or credit committee.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. The data room for a dairy processing engagement typically includes the business plan or executive summary, equipment quotes, construction budget, milk supply agreements or producer letters, offtake contracts or distributor commitments, three years of historical financials for any operating entity, and the organizational and ownership documents the program requires. Incomplete data rooms extend the timeline; the engagement clock starts when the room is complete, not when the engagement is opened.
Rush delivery is available and is quoted at the time of engagement. Every engagement is published to a secure client portal where the linked Excel model remains live: any input can be changed and the model recalculates in real time, allowing a lender's credit officer or an agency reviewer to run additional stress scenarios without requesting a revised report. The narrative report is delivered as a bound document. The model and report together constitute the complete deliverable; no element is withheld pending additional fees. An explicit statement of conditions accompanies every study, identifying the assumptions on which the determination rests and the circumstances that would change it.
The fee is fixed and quoted in writing within one business day of inquiry. It does not vary with the loan amount or the finding. Because scope, program requirements, and data complexity differ by engagement, the firm quotes each project individually rather than publishing a schedule. No fee is contingent on a favorable determination.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. Rush delivery is available and quoted at engagement. The timeline depends on data completeness: milk supply agreements, equipment budgets, offtake documentation, and historical financials must all be in hand before the clock starts. Incomplete submissions are the most common cause of delay.
Three factors distinguish dairy processing from most food manufacturing: raw-milk cost is set partly by federal marketing order formula rather than open negotiation, making input-cost control limited; product perishability constrains the distribution radius and therefore the addressable market; and specialized refrigeration and processing equipment carries a thin secondary market, which affects collateral recovery assumptions in a liquidation scenario.
No. A feasibility study is an independent analytical determination, not a credit approval and not a guarantee of any outcome. The study documents whether the evidence supports viability under the applicable underwriting standard. The lending institution or agency makes the credit decision. A study that cannot support a positive finding will say so.
The core data room includes the business plan or project summary, equipment quotes, construction budget, milk supply agreements or producer commitments, offtake contracts or distributor letters, three years of historical financials for any operating entity, and organizational documents. Federal marketing order affiliation and any existing state dairy plant license or application should also be included where available.
A single study can address both programs if it is scoped to meet each program’s requirements from the outset. SBA SOP 50 10 8 and USDA 7 CFR Part 5001 share common financial-analysis requirements but differ on rural-impact documentation, coverage minimums, and collateral treatment. The engagement must be structured to satisfy both sets of criteria, which is addressed in the scope agreement before work begins.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.