1998Practice founded4,000+Client engagements$41.2 billionEvaluated project valueSince 1982Institutional underwritingMAI · ASA-GC · BCA · CMEAIn-house valuation designations
Wert-Berater, Inc. — Independent Feasibility Study Consultants
← Back to Services
Independent Feasibility Studies · Healthcare & Medical Facilities

Dental Practice & Oral Surgery Facility Feasibility Studies

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.

Watch: a short video overview — Dental Practice & Oral Surgery Facility Feasibility Studies

The Feasibility Question

Dental facilities — general practices, pediatric and orthodontic offices, oral-surgery centers, and multi-site DSO locations — are chair-economics businesses: production per operatory, the provider hours that fill the chairs, and a payer mix spanning PPO contracts, fee-for-service, and Medicaid that prices identical procedures very differently. The study sizes patient demand from population-to-dentist ratios in the draw area, models production by operatory against provider capacity, and validates the buildout budget at clinical costs — plumbing, imaging, sterilization — that commodity office space never carries.

Methodology

Demand from dentist-per-capita gap analysis and competitive census, production modeling per operatory at procedure-mix yields by payer, hygiene-department economics modeled separately as the recurring base, startup ramp from documented new-practice curves, and acquisition analyses tied to verified production history rather than asking-price narratives.

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.

Lending Compliance

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. Owner-dentist projects are core SBA territory — practice acquisitions, ground-up buildings, equipment packages; DSO-affiliated expansions route conventional with the management agreement reviewed.

Experience

The firm's professional-practice underwriting applies its standard throughput discipline to the operatory: chairs, hours, and yield. 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.

Scope of a Dental Practice & Oral Surgery Facility Feasibility Study

A feasibility study for a dental or oral surgery facility goes well beyond a generic cash-flow projection. Because production is constrained by physical operatories, provider hours, and payer-contract rates rather than by square footage or occupancy, every deliverable is built around those three constraints from the first worksheet forward.

  • Operatory-level production schedule — chair count, scheduled hours per chair per day, and procedure-mix yield by payer category (PPO, fee-for-service, Medicaid, capitation) built separately for each provider type.
  • Hygiene-department model — recall volume, reactivation assumptions, and hygiene revenue modeled as a standalone revenue center with its own staffing and supply cost line.
  • Oral-surgery-specific revenue streams — surgical extractions, implant placement, bone grafting, and IV-sedation fees modeled at procedure-level fee schedules rather than blended averages.
  • Buildout cost validation — plumbing rough-in per operatory, dental-unit and cabinetry packages, panoramic and CBCT imaging infrastructure, sterilization room, and nitrous or sedation gas lines reviewed against contractor bids or published clinical construction benchmarks.
  • Equipment and technology schedule — chair packages, digital radiography, intraoral scanners, and autoclave capacity reconciled to the SBA or conventional loan request.
  • Startup ramp and stabilization timeline — new-patient flow modeled against documented new-practice growth curves, with a separate acquisition-scenario track tied to verified prior-year production.
  • Explicit statement of conditions — the assumptions on which the favorable determination rests, stated so any reviewing credit officer can confirm or challenge each one.

How Market & Demand Analysis Is Built for Dental Practice Feasibility Studies

Demand for dental services is population-driven and geographically bounded. Patients rarely travel more than a defined radius for routine care; oral surgery and specialty services draw from a wider but still measurable area. The analysis begins by delineating a primary and secondary draw zone using drive-time polygons rather than arbitrary radius circles, then layers population and demographic data onto that geography.

Dentist-to-population ratios are assembled from state dental licensing board registries, which record active licensees by practice address, and cross-checked against National Provider Identifier records maintained in the CMS NPPES database. Both sources are public and updated on a rolling basis, giving an accurate active-provider count rather than a stale directory estimate.

Competitive supply is inventoried by physical site visit and confirmed against Google Maps business listings, state board records, and local health department filings. For oral surgery specifically, hospital-based oral surgery departments and ambulatory surgery center rosters filed with the state health department are included in the competitive count because they compete for the same referral base.

Payer-mix context is drawn from state Medicaid managed-care enrollment data, insurer network directories, and, where available, Health Resources & Services Administration shortage-area designations, which also inform USDA Community Facilities and SBA underserved-market analyses. Traffic and access patterns are reviewed where a ground-up or relocation project depends on visibility and ingress.

The Assumptions That Decide Coverage in Oral Surgery & Dental Facility Feasibility Studies

A small change in any one of four inputs can move a dental or oral surgery facility from bankable to marginal. The study isolates each, documents the source, and stress-tests it across the sensitivity matrix so the lender can see exactly where the margin disappears.

  • Operatory utilization rate — the percentage of scheduled chair-hours that generate billable production. Overstating this input is the single most common error in sponsor-prepared projections; the study benchmarks it against documented new-practice and mature-practice curves and applies a conservative ramp.
  • Payer mix and net collection rate — PPO contractual adjustments, Medicaid fee schedules, and fee-for-service write-offs each produce a different net yield on the same gross production; the model runs each payer tier separately and applies verified contractual adjustment percentages rather than blended estimates.
  • Provider compensation and associate structure — owner-doctor production, associate production-percentage agreements, and specialist days (for oral surgery referral days) are modeled individually because each carries a different cost structure and a different risk if a provider departs.
  • Buildout and equipment cost — clinical construction runs materially higher per square foot than general office; cost overruns that push the loan amount above the appraised value of equipment collateral are stress-tested at plus ten and plus fifteen percent.
  • Referral-base concentration for oral surgery — a center that depends on a small number of referring general practices carries concentration risk; the study documents referral-source diversity and models a partial-referral-loss scenario.

What Lenders & Agencies Look for When Reviewing a Dental or Oral Surgery Feasibility Study

SBA credit officers reviewing a dental practice or oral surgery facility under SOP 50 10 8 focus first on whether the study was prepared by an independent third party with no contingent fee, and second on whether the 1.15x operating and 1.00x global coverage minimums are met on realistic — not optimistic — assumptions. Because owner-dentist transactions are core SBA professional-practice territory, the agency expects the study to address prior-year production history for acquisitions, or documented population need for startups, not simply a business plan narrative.

USDA Business & Industry and Community Facilities reviewers apply 7 CFR Part 5001 and look specifically at whether the facility serves a rural population with documented access gaps. Dental and oral surgery facilities qualify under Community Facilities when they serve a community of eligible size; the study must address the service-area population, existing provider supply, and the project's ability to sustain debt service without ongoing subsidy.

Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and place additional weight on the owner-dentist's personal production history, the transferability of the patient base in an acquisition, and the collateral coverage of the equipment package. For DSO-affiliated locations, lenders review the management agreement to understand fee obligations that reduce effective cash flow before debt service. The study addresses each of these angles explicitly so the credit memo can cite the feasibility report rather than reconstruct the analysis from scratch.

Cost, Timeline & How a Dental Feasibility Study Engagement Runs

The fee for a dental practice or oral surgery facility feasibility study is fixed and quoted in writing within one business day of an initial inquiry. No portion of the fee is contingent on the outcome, and the determination is not revised because a sponsor disagrees with the finding. That structure is a requirement of the SBA and USDA programs the studies support, and it is also the only arrangement consistent with a fiduciary duty that runs to the lender and reviewing agency rather than to the borrower.

Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. For dental and oral surgery projects, a complete data room includes the prior three years of production reports (for acquisitions), the signed lease or purchase agreement, contractor bids or a detailed buildout estimate, the equipment package, the proposed fee schedule, payer-contract summaries, and provider employment or associate agreements. Rush delivery is available when a rate-lock or closing deadline requires it.

Every engagement is published to a secure client portal where the linked Excel model stays live. Because every cell is formula-driven with no hardcoded values, a credit officer can change the operatory count, the payer mix, or the interest rate and watch every downstream ratio recalculate immediately. That transparency is not a feature added for convenience; it is the standard the firm has applied to every engagement since 1998, across 4,000+ engagements representing $41.2 billion in evaluated project value.

Frequently asked questions

How much does a dental practice feasibility study cost?

The fee is fixed, quoted in writing within one business day, and does not vary with the loan amount or the study outcome. No portion is contingent on a favorable finding. Because scope varies by project type — a single-operatory startup differs from a multi-site oral surgery center — the quote is specific to the engagement after a brief intake conversation.

How long does it take to get a dental or oral surgery feasibility study back?

Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. The most common delay is an incomplete data room: missing production reports, unsigned leases, or absent equipment schedules add time. Rush delivery is available when a closing or rate-lock deadline requires a shorter turnaround; that option and any associated fee adjustment are disclosed in the engagement letter.

What makes dental and oral surgery facilities hard to underwrite compared to other medical practices?

Three factors distinguish this asset class. First, revenue is bounded by physical operatory count and provider hours, so there is a hard ceiling on production that a general revenue-growth assumption can easily overstate. Second, payer-mix complexity — PPO contractual adjustments, Medicaid fee schedules, and fee-for-service rates pricing identical procedures very differently — means net yield must be modeled by payer tier, not blended. Third, for oral surgery centers, referral-base concentration risk requires a scenario analysis that most sponsor projections omit entirely.

Will an SBA lender accept this feasibility study?

Studies are prepared to SBA SOP 50 10 8, including its independence requirements and its 1.15x operating and 1.00x global debt-service-coverage minimums. The firm does not represent that any agency has pre-approved or endorsed its work; acceptance is the lender's and agency's determination. The study is built to pass review without exception items, and the fiduciary duty runs to the lender and agency, not the borrower.

What production data is needed from the seller for a dental practice acquisition feasibility study?

A complete data room for an acquisition includes three years of practice management software production reports (not tax returns alone), a payer-mix breakdown by year, the current fee schedule, provider schedules showing hours worked, and any associate or hygienist employment agreements. Tax returns are reviewed alongside production data because discrepancies between the two are an underwriting concern the study must address directly.

Can the feasibility study cover a USDA loan for a rural dental clinic?

Yes. USDA engagements follow 7 CFR Part 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Dental and oral surgery facilities serving eligible rural communities qualify under Community Facilities when population thresholds are met. The study addresses service-area population, existing provider supply, documented access gaps, and the project's ability to sustain debt service — the specific factors USDA reviewers examine.

Schedule a Zoom
Talk the project through with the analyst who would run it. Fixed fee quoted in one business day; delivery in 10–15 business days.
Schedule a Qualification Zoom +1 310-857-2443
Related Services
Hospital (Acute Care, Specialty, Micro-Hospital) Feasibility Studies Rural & Critical Access Hospital Feasibility Studies Medical Office Building (MOB) Feasibility Studies Urgent Care Center Feasibility Studies Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) Feasibility Studies
Related Articles
Medical Facilities Feasibility Study Ambulatory Surgery Center Feasibility Study The Growing Demand for Medical Office Construction and Its Impact on Rents and Absorption Best Practices for Lender Grade Reports Conditions Precedent: How Honest Studies Handle Unresolved Risk Feasibility Studies for Conventional Lenders: The 1.20x Standard All articles →
Ready when you are
Book a Zoom with the principal

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 →
Related project types
Hospital (Acute Care, Specialty, Micro-Hospital) Rural & Critical Access Hospital Medical Office Building (MOB) Urgent Care Center Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) Diagnostic Imaging Center
More
Full project-type index Wert-Berater main site
← Back to Services

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.

Services  ·  Experience

© 1998–2026 Wert-Berater, Inc. All rights reserved.