The purpose of a feasibility study is to evaluate whether a proposed project is viable—both strategically and financially. It provides a structured framework to assess core dimensions of feasibility, including market demand, economic viability, technical requirements, and financial performance. The goal is to inform decision-making by identifying potential risks, constraints, and expected returns—ultimately guiding whether the project should proceed, be restructured, or halted. In practice, most feasibility studies are organized into key components such as economic, market, technical, and financial feasibility (among others).

The Executive Summary is a concise overview of the feasibility study’s key findings and conclusions. At MMCG, we know time is valuable. That’s why our full feasibility studies—often more than 200 pages of rigorous analysis—are distilled into a succinct, six-page Executive Summary. This streamlined format lets decision-makers grasp the project’s key elements and risks quickly, without sacrificing substance.

The Executive Summary delivers a sharp, comprehensive snapshot of viability: project purpose, proposed solution, market demand, high-level cost and revenue projections, and a clear go/no-go recommendation. Because stakeholders typically read this section first, we ensure it communicates the bottom line at a glance—enabling swift, informed decisions.

Economic Feasibility provides a comprehensive assessment of the physical, legal, and demographic characteristics of the proposed project and its location. Key considerations include:

Site & Infrastructure – A detailed physical site profile covering parcel size, shape, elevation, soil conditions, and buildable acreage—supported by recent high-resolution satellite and aerial imagery. This includes evaluation of site constraints such as topography and environmental limitations.

Zoning & Entitlements – Parcel-level due diligence encompassing ownership, title status, zoning classifications, overlay districts, and entitlement pathways. This also includes identification of hard-line restrictions such as flood zones, utility easements, powerline and gas pipeline corridors, and roadway setbacks.

Infrastructure & Access – Assessment of utility capacity (water, sewer, electricity, gas, and telecom) and transportation access. Roadway analysis includes hierarchy, ingress/egress conditions, and turning-movement counts.

Target Demographics & Location Intelligence – Demographic screening across 1-, 3-, and 5-mile (or drive-time) bands to verify alignment with the project’s target population. This includes age distribution, income levels, employment sectors, and lifestyle segmentation. Location intelligence incorporates anonymized mobile-device traffic flow data and neighborhood indicators such as crime rates, school quality, and adjacent land use.

Local Economic Insight – City, county, and regional overviews highlighting growth catalysts, public infrastructure investments, economic development initiatives, and relevant incentive programs.

Labor & Resource Availability – Analysis of local labor market conditions, including availability of a skilled or trainable workforce, prevailing wage rates, and specialized skillsets. Evaluation of supply chain access and availability of critical inputs is also included.

Market Feasibility evaluates the current and projected demand for the proposed project’s product or service, as well as the competitive dynamics within the target market. This section determines whether sufficient market interest exists to support the project at sustainable, profitable levels. Key components include:

Industry Overview & Sector Positioning

A high-level dashboard offering a 360-degree view of the broader industry in which the project operates. This includes current industry size (by revenue, square footage, or other relevant KPIs), recent performance trends, market saturation levels, and demand-supply imbalances. The analysis identifies structural growth drivers, emerging threats (e.g., technological disruption, regulatory shifts), and future outlook based on industry forecasts. This sets the contextual backdrop for understanding how the proposed project fits within sector-wide dynamics.

Primary Market Area (PMA) Definition

Identification of the project’s primary market area, where the majority of future customers or tenants are expected to originate. MMCG leverages the latest AI-driven mobile phone data and tracking applications to map customer origin, visitation patterns, and traffic flows—complemented by classical geodemographic techniques. This ensures a precise, evidence-based delineation of the PMA.

Competitive Market Area (CMA) & Competitive Set

Definition of the broader competitive market area where comparable offerings influence pricing, absorption, and supply-side dynamics. This includes identification of key competitors—existing and pipeline projects—whose positioning affects the subject project’s strategic outlook. The CMA helps define how much capacity the market can absorb, and at what speed.

Demand Analysis

Assessment of demand volume, velocity, and trajectory within the PMA. For real estate projects (e.g., multifamily, flex industrial, retail), this includes absorption rates, vacancy trends, pre-leasing levels, and tenant/customer migration patterns. Both historical and forecast models are used to validate whether unmet demand exists and can be captured within the proposed development timeframe.

Competitive Landscape & Supply Pipeline

In-depth analysis of comparable inventory across the CMA, including asset characteristics (size, age, quality), operational performance (occupancy, lease-up pace), and pricing. This step quantifies existing and future competition and clarifies the project's differentiation strategy.

Suitability Analysis

A comparative evaluation of the subject site against existing competitor locations, using key demographic, economic, and behavioral indicators. This analysis benchmarks the project’s location in terms of population density, income levels, employment mix, educational attainment, age distribution, and consumer lifestyle segments—within a defined comparable trade area. The objective is to quantify location-based advantages or disadvantages relative to established competitors. Additionally, proximity to infrastructure, visibility, accessibility, and adjacency to demand generators (e.g., employers, institutions, retail clusters) are analyzed. This ensures the new project is positioned with a clear understanding of how its location stacks up against the market and where strategic gaps or opportunities exist.

Market Rates & Pricing Strategy

Analysis of prevailing lease rates or sales pricing for similar offerings. The study benchmarks asking and effective rates—adjusted for concessions, incentives, or operating expenses—to establish a realistic revenue model. It also assesses the project's ability to price competitively while achieving required returns.

Conclusion:

The market feasibility section validates whether the project can compete effectively within its defined market area—based on industry-level context, local demand, and the competitive supply environment. It combines sector intelligence, AI-powered location analytics, and market fundamentals to deliver a rigorous, data-backed foundation for go/no-go decisions.

Technical / Cost Feasibility evaluates whether the proposed project can be physically delivered on the selected site and whether the projected development costs are realistic, justifiable, and aligned with market benchmarks. This component answers two critical questions: Can the project be built, and can it be built within a financially viable budget? Key elements include:

Technical Viability – A detailed assessment of physical, engineering, and operational requirements to confirm that the site can support the proposed development program. This includes validation of site capacity (e.g., allowable building footprint, height, parking, and circulation), as well as confirmation that the proposed design, construction methodology, and any associated technologies are technically feasible given site-specific constraints. The analysis ensures that no material obstacles—such as soil conditions, topography, access limitations, or environmental issues—would impede implementation.

Cost Estimation & Benchmarking – Development of a preliminary project cost, covering all major cost categories including land acquisition, site preparation, construction, soft costs (design, permitting, legal), contingencies, and FF&E where applicable. Project costs are validated using independent third-party benchmarks (e.g., Marshall & Swift, RSMeans, Altus) and comparable recent developments values – typically from active CMBS loans. The analysis highlights the project's cost per square foot (or per unit) relative to market norms, flagging any variances that may warrant value engineering or scope adjustment.

Implementation Timeline & Delivery Feasibility – Evaluation of the project schedule to determine whether the proposed timeline is realistic given the scope, entitlement requirements, permitting processes, and anticipated construction duration. Risk factors such as seasonal weather impacts, labor availability, and supply chain volatility are considered. The timeline is assessed not only for feasibility but also for its impact on carrying costs, absorption timing, and investor returns.

Cost–Benefit Alignment & Value Justification – The technical/cost feasibility analysis is integrated with financial modeling to validate that projected capital costs are supported by anticipated economic value or revenue generation. This may involve a Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) or Net Present Value (NPV) test, comparing upfront investment to future income or exit value. A positive return profile reinforces the investment case; conversely, cost overruns or weak returns may trigger design revisions or budget adjustments.

Conclusion:

The technical/cost feasibility section ensures that the project is physically executable on the chosen site and that its cost structure is grounded in industry reality. It validates that no critical technical barriers exist, and that the proposed investment is proportionate to the project’s expected financial performance and market potential. As the project advances, this analysis can be continuously refined with real contractor bids and updated cost data to maintain alignment with feasibility thresholds.

Financial Feasibility evaluates whether the proposed project will be financially sustainable and capable of delivering acceptable returns over time. This section translates market, technical, and cost assumptions into financial projections—determining if the project can (i) meet its debt obligations, (ii) provide sufficient returns to investors, and (iii) remain viable under various economic conditions. Key components include:

Pro Forma Financial Projections – A comprehensive set of financial statements is prepared, typically including a detailed 1-year monthly projection and a 10-year annual forecast. The pro forma model outlines projected revenues, operating expenses, net operating income, capital expenditures, and debt service. Assumptions are explicitly defined and grounded in market data—for example: lease-up pace, stabilized occupancy, rental rates, operating cost inflation, and expense loadings. Particular attention is paid to the Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR), with a threshold of ≥1.25x commonly required for bankable, SBA, or USDA feasibility studies.

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) & Return Metrics – A DCF model evaluates the present value of future cash flows, net of capital costs, to determine overall project value. Key return indicators include Net Present Value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR), calculated on both a leveraged (with financing) and unleveraged (all-cash) basis. These metrics are evaluated across various holding periods (e.g., 3, 5, and 10 years) to test exit scenarios. A project is considered financially feasible when the IRR meets or exceeds investor thresholds and the NPV is positive—signaling that returns outweigh initial investment.

Debt Service & Cash Flow Viability – For financed projects, the analysis rigorously tests the project’s ability to service debt obligations. DSCR is calculated annually over the loan term to ensure that projected Net Operating Income (NOI) can reliably cover principal and interest payments. Lender thresholds (typically ≥1.20x to 1.30x) are compared to modeled outputs. In addition, the analysis may present Return on Equity (ROE) and cash-on-cash returns, providing visibility into investor yields after debt obligations are met.

Sensitivity / Stress Testing – A multi-scenario sensitivity analysis models how changes in critical inputs—such as occupancy, rental rates, OPEX, or construction cost—impact financial performance. The feasibility study will test best-case, base-case, and worst-case outcomes, illustrating how volatile or resilient the project’s returns are under varying market conditions. Scenarios are benchmarked against DSCR, NPV, IRR, and breakeven thresholds. Projects with stable performance across stress scenarios demonstrate higher feasibility and lower underwriting risk.

Break-Even Analysis – Calculation of occupancy and revenue break-even points—defined as the thresholds at which revenues cover all operating expenses and debt service. For example, the model may determine that the project achieves cash-flow breakeven at 68% occupancy. This metric provides lenders and equity partners with a clear risk buffer: the gap between projected stabilized occupancy and the breakeven threshold.

Conclusion:

The financial feasibility section provides a rigorous, data-driven assessment of whether the project is bankable and investable. It confirms that projected revenues are sufficient to cover operating costs and debt obligations, generate competitive returns, and remain resilient under adverse scenarios. A financially feasible project not only delivers acceptable investor outcomes but also satisfies lender risk criteria—making it critical for SBA, USDA, and conventional financing approvals.

When seeking funding from certain government programs or lenders, a feasibility study often must meet specific requirements. In particular, projects involving the Small Business Administration (SBA) or the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) typically require specialized feasibility studies aligned with those agencies’ guidelines. Many government-backed loan and grant programs insist on a professional, third-party feasibility study as part of the application or underwriting process. This is because a strong feasibility study gives lenders or grant agencies (like the USDA or SBA) confidence that the project is viable, thereby reducing perceived risk and increasing the chances of approval.

SBA Feasibility Study: If you are applying for an SBA loan (such as an SBA 504 or 7(a) loan for a business venture or real estate development), the SBA lender may ask for a feasibility study to be conducted. An SBA feasibility study typically needs to cover market demand, competition, financial projections, and operational plans in depth– demonstrating that the business can generate sufficient cash flow to repay the loan. The study should be prepared by an independent, qualified consultant to ensure objectivity. Meeting SBA requirements often means the report must address specific questions about the project’s revenue model, management experience, and assumptions behind the projections. By presenting a clear and well-supported feasibility analysis, borrowers can significantly improve and expedite their SBA loan underwriting process.

USDA Feasibility Study: For projects in rural areas or those eligible for USDA Rural Development programs (for example, community facilities loans, rural business development grants, or USDA-guaranteed loans), a USDA feasibility study is frequently mandated. In fact, most investments supported by USDA loans or grants (and even new market tax credit projects) require a feasibility study as part of the application. A USDA feasibility study usually must include all the standard components (market, technical, financial, etc.) but with additional emphasis on the economic impact to the rural community and alignment with USDA program goals. The USDA and its lenders will review the study to ensure the project is sound and will be sustainable in the long term, as these projects often involve critical infrastructure or services for rural communities. As with SBA, the study should be conducted by experienced professionals familiar with USDA’s guidelines to be deemed acceptable.

MMCG has extensive experience preparing feasibility studies that satisfy both SBA and USDA criteria. We understand what these agencies are looking for and make sure to address every requirement in our reports. Whether it’s a private real estate development or a rural project seeking federal support, we provide feasibility studies for all real estate and USDA projects – ensuring each analysis is thorough, unbiased, and compliant with the relevant standards. In doing so, we help clients move their projects forward with the confidence that their feasibility study will instill trust in lenders and funding partners.