SBA RV Park & Campground Feasibility Study Consultants

What an RV park feasibility study consultant does for an SBA loan

SBA RV park loan performance: the SBA RV Park Lending Ledger

SBA does not publish loan performance by industry. The firm computes it from SBA’s loan-level FOIA files and publishes the results, so a credit reviewer can test an RV park file against the record of its class. The same method underlies the SBA Feasibility Risk Meter and the SBA 7(a) charge-off rates by industry.

Methodology. Disbursed loans only. Adverse resolution means purchased by SBA, liquidated or charged off. Seasoned means approved FY2010–FY2021, allowing at least four years of performance. The charge-off rate is by count on mature 7(a) cohorts. Source: SBA 7(a) and 504 FOIA loan-level data as of March 31, 2026; firm analysis. Full data methodology.

What the record does and does not say. The seasoned cohort is small (744 loans, about two dozen adverse outcomes), so its rate carries a wider margin than larger classes. It was also approved before the 2021–2022 camping peak and the 2025–2026 fall in transient demand. A class-level rate is a reason a well-built park file can be approved, not evidence that a given park will perform. For loss given default by collateral type, see SBA loan loss severity by property type.

The SBA transient-revenue test for RV parks

An RV park or campground is an eligible operating business only while it earns most of its revenue from short stays. SOP 50 10 8 provides that “Hotels, motels, recreational vehicle parks, marinas, campgrounds, or similar types of businesses are eligible if more than 50% of the business’s revenue for the prior year is derived from transients who stay for 30 days or less at a time and the business complies with all zoning and other legal requirements.” A start-up must show the same in its projections. “Apartment buildings and mobile home parks are not eligible,” and an ineligible business “cannot obtain an SBA Loan for any purpose.” SOP 50 10 8.1, in force for loans numbered on or after October 1, 2026 (Information Notice 5000-882227, September 25, 2026), is reported to carry the test forward unchanged. The SBA residential eligibility map shows where the same line falls for apartments and senior housing.

State campground and landlord-tenant laws use their own thresholds for when a guest becomes a tenant. The study tests the SBA 30-day line and the state rule separately, as part of the site and regulatory assessment.

In the illustrative case, a park that passes today at 55.4 percent transient fails in year three if transient revenue keeps falling at the rate Equity LifeStyle reported in Q3 2026 while long-stay revenue grows at its annual-site rate.

When an SBA lender orders an RV park feasibility study

No SBA rule makes a feasibility study mandatory for an RV park loan. 13 CFR 120.160(b) provides only that “SBA may require professional appraisals of the applicant’s and principals’ assets, a survey, or a feasibility study.” Lenders and CDCs order one in four situations, consistent with the triggers described in when SBA requires a feasibility study.

• Seller-commissioned QoE reports are not accepted.
• Change-of-ownership loans that include real estate use two separate loans or one loan with a blended maturity.
• The historical test reads fiscal-year EBITDA (or a two-year average). It does not test the off-season trough; the study does, using the financial projection and DSCR methodology.

For fiscal year 2027, SBA sets a 0 percent upfront guaranty fee on 7(a) loans of $700,000 or less to businesses located in rural areas (Information Notice 5000-881797, published September 3, 2026, effective October 1, 2026). For 504 loans approved October 1, 2026 through September 30, 2027, it waives both the upfront guaranty fee and the annual service fee for rural businesses. Many parks qualify, and the study confirms the project address’s rural status at engagement. The October 2026 SBA feasibility monitor and rural versus urban feasibility cover the wider changes.

How to choose an RV park feasibility study consultant

A lender reads an RV park feasibility study to decide whether it can rely on it. Seven tests separate a study that survives credit committee and SBA review from one that comes back with questions. They apply to any consultant, including this firm, and expand on the general guide to choosing a feasibility consultant.

1. 1. The transient test is modelled year by year.

   Revenue is split by stay length in every projection year, and the study states the year, if any, in which eligibility would fail.

2. 2. Seasonal coverage is shown by quarter or month.

   The off-season reserve is sized, because annual coverage hides the trough.

3. 3. Demand is separated and named.

   Highway pass-through and destination demand are analyzed separately. The competitive set includes state parks, Corps of Engineers and national forest campgrounds where they compete.

4. 4. Rates and occupancy come from the competitive set.

   Seasonal performance is taken from comparable parks by site type, not from “months of operation” averages or national rules of thumb.

5. 5. Current SBA rule fluency.

   The study reflects SOP 50 10 8.1 and its acquisition tests, the transient test, the conditional environmental rule, the full flood-insurance scope and FY2027 rural fee relief.

6. 6. Independence and a named signatory.

   The study is addressed to the lender as intended user, the fee is fixed, and one accountable professional signs, with the analyst and reviewer named.

7. 7. Reconciliation with the appraisal, and willingness to say no.

   The study and appraisal use the same revenue breakdown by stay type. The published record includes findings of not feasible, or feasible only with conditions.

Sites with vehicle-storage income need a separate boat and RV storage feasibility study, with demand drawn from registrations and recreation access rather than overnight visitation.

Who prepares your RV park feasibility study

David Jones, MAI, CCIM, Principal of SBA Feasibility Study LLC, is the author and signatory of every study the firm issues. Over his career he has completed more than 4,300 feasibility studies across RV parks and outdoor hospitality, hotels, fuel and convenience, car washes, self-storage, multifamily and healthcare. The firm’s studies have been accepted by 534 SBA 7(a) lenders and 107 Certified Development Companies across 50 states.

Every study is signed by the firm, with the analyst and reviewer identified. There is no white-labelling and no unsigned draft that later becomes the basis for a credit decision. The firm is not a lender, broker, developer, franchisor, booking platform or park operator. The approach follows the firm’s three-pillar methodology.

RV park and outdoor-hospitality engagement record

Determinations are the firm’s independent findings. Credit and eligibility decisions rest with the lender, the CDC and SBA. Related hospitality work: the Leander limited-service hotel and Hill Country wedding venue case studies, and the full engagement library.

What an RV park feasibility study consultant analyzes

Two SBA rules apply to every park: more than 50 percent of revenue must come from transient guests staying 30 days or less, and a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is required where fuel is sold (see the SBA gas station environmental rules), tanks are present or vehicle repairs are performed onsite. RV parks are not named on SBA’s non-exhaustive list of special-purpose property examples, but lenders often underwrite them with special-purpose rigor.

Site count optimization by acreage

The number of rentable sites you can fit on a parcel determines the revenue ceiling. Site count optimization balances density (more sites equals more revenue) against guest experience (overcrowded parks suffer lower occupancy and lower rates) and regulatory constraints (setback requirements, septic capacity, stormwater management).

Densities and revenue ranges are planning rules of thumb, not published standards. Each study calibrates them to local zoning, septic and utility capacity, and the actual performance of comparable parks; nationally, the median park in ARVC’s 2023 benchmarking survey had 92 sites on about 23 acres.

The revenue-per-acre economics strongly favor glamping and cabin units over traditional RV sites. A single glamping tent on a quarter-acre generates $15,000 to $40,000 annually, compared to $8,000 to $18,000 for a full-hookup pull-through site on a similar footprint. This math is driving the industry trend toward mixed-use parks that combine traditional RV sites with a higher-margin lodging component. The feasibility study must model the revenue mix across all site types and identify the optimal allocation for the specific parcel and market. Unit revenue depends heavily on location, season length and format, and the study sets glamping rates from local comparables.

Seasonal vs year-round demand

Seasonality is the defining characteristic of RV park economics. Unlike hotels, which averaged about 62% occupancy nationally in 2025, RV parks in northern climates may operate only 5 to 7 months per year. Even in Sun Belt markets with year-round operations, occupancy swings of 40 to 50 percentage points between peak and trough are common.

Ranges are illustrative. By site type, ARVC’s 2023 benchmarking survey reported mean occupancy during months of operation of about 68 percent for full-hookup sites, 46 percent for water and electric sites and 25 percent for tent sites; on a rolling 365-day basis, OHI and Campspot reported 34.8 percent occupancy as of March 2025. Each study uses the competitive set’s actual seasonal pattern.

The DSCR calculation must account for seasonal cash flow. An RV park in Montana that generates 90% of its annual revenue between Memorial Day and Labor Day must service 12 months of debt payments from 5 months of income. The feasibility study models monthly cash flow and demonstrates that the borrower can accumulate sufficient reserves during peak season to cover debt service through the off-season. Lenders will reject annual DSCR projections that do not show how the borrower survives the trough months. The thresholds are set out in the DSCR guide for SBA loans, and the DSCR calculator tests a single year.

Seasonal coverage: what annual DSCR hides

SBA’s historical coverage test, and most credit memos, read a full fiscal year. A park that earns most of its revenue in summer must still pay debt service every month. The study models revenue and cost by quarter or month and reports coverage in each period. It sizes the reserve the park must carry out of its peak season to stay current through the off-season. In the illustrative case below, annual coverage of 1.41x conceals a first quarter at 0.43x, and the park must carry about $66,400 out of its peak season.

Revenue per site benchmarking

Revenue per available site (RevPAS) is the RV park equivalent of a hotel’s RevPAR. It combines occupancy and nightly rate into a single metric that drives the financial model. We benchmark RevPAS against comparable parks using KOA’s annual Camping & Outdoor Hospitality Report, benchmarking data from ARVC (the National Association of RV Parks & Campgrounds) and state campground owners associations, Campspot booking trends, and direct competitor rate shopping, under the market analysis methodology.

Nightly rates vary dramatically by market, amenity level, and site type. A basic back-in site in a rural area may command $25 to $40 per night. A full-hookup pull-through at a destination resort with pool, clubhouse, and lake access may reach $65 to $120. Glamping units at premium destinations command $150 to $350 per night, approaching hotel pricing. The feasibility study must validate rate assumptions against the specific competitive set, not national averages. For reference, ARVC’s 2023 survey reported median full-hookup rates of about $55 midweek and $58 on weekends, Insider Perks’ Outdoor Hospitality Price Index put the all-segment weighted average at $103.97 in June 2026 and $102.72 in August 2026, and Equity LifeStyle cites roughly $80 to $90 a night for a transient customer. Campspot reports a median stay of three nights, with RVs accounting for 77% of its 2025 bookings.

Long-term and monthly rentals

Many RV parks generate a significant share of revenue from long-term residents (monthly or seasonal renters) rather than nightly transients. Monthly rates typically run $500 to $1,200 for a full-hookup site (ARVC’s 2023 median was about $800), representing a substantial discount from the nightly rate but providing guaranteed occupancy and predictable revenue. The feasibility study must model the optimal mix of transient vs long-term sites. Long-term revenue also carries an SBA eligibility limit: RV parks and campgrounds are eligible only if more than 50% of revenue for the prior year (or projected, for a start-up) comes from transients who stay 30 days or less at a time. Mobile home parks are not eligible. The study tracks the transient revenue share in every projection year, because a park that drifts toward monthly residents can drift out of eligibility; the transient-revenue test projector shows how quickly that can happen.

Amenity package ROI analysis

Amenities drive both rate premium and occupancy. But not all amenities generate equal return on investment, and the optimal package depends on the target market.

The feasibility study models amenity costs as part of the total development budget and projects the rate premium and occupancy lift each amenity generates. This analysis helps the borrower prioritize capital allocation: should you build the pool or add 10 more sites? The answer depends on the market, the competitive set, and the target demographic. Rate and occupancy effects shown are planning estimates; the study validates them against local competitors with and without each amenity.

Glamping and cabin hybrid models

The fastest-growing segment of outdoor hospitality is hybrid parks that combine traditional RV sites with glamping tents, yurts, treehouses, A-frames, tiny homes, or luxury cabins. This model diversifies the revenue stream, attracts a broader guest demographic, and substantially increases revenue per acre.

A 50-site RV park generating $600,000 in annual revenue can add 8 glamping units producing $200,000 to $320,000 (illustrative) in additional revenue on less than 2 acres. The capital investment for 8 glamping units varies widely by format, and in strong markets it can be recovered quickly, but the payback must be demonstrated with local rate and occupancy evidence rather than assumed. KOA’s 2026 report found that cabins and glamping accounted for 29 percent of all camping by accommodation type in 2025, and more than 15 million households glamped. For SBA borrowers, this hybrid model strengthens the DSCR projection because the higher-margin lodging units compensate for the seasonality and lower per-site revenue of traditional RV sites.

Campspot data show glamping guests travel shorter distances (251 miles against 386 for RV guests), and 64 percent of glamping reservations are one or two nights, against 48 percent for RV and seasonal stays. Hybrid revenue is therefore modelled on a different demand radius and length-of-stay profile from the RV sites. The glamping resort feasibility study and the Sedona glamping case study cover the lodging side in depth.

The feasibility study must address the permitting and zoning implications of hybrid models. Some jurisdictions classify glamping structures differently than RV sites, potentially requiring conditional use permits, building permits (if the structures are permanent), or compliance with residential building codes. These regulatory requirements affect both the development timeline and the capital budget.

Competitive analysis for RV parks

RV park trade areas are larger than most commercial properties. Destination parks (near national parks, lakes, beaches) draw from a regional or national market. Local/neighborhood parks serving long-term residents draw from a 10 to 30 mile radius. The feasibility study must define the competitive set based on the park’s positioning: a destination resort competes with other destination parks within a 30 to 60 minute drive, while a long-term residential park competes with parks within a 15 to 20 mile radius.

We inventory all competing parks and campgrounds within the defined trade area, documenting site count by type, nightly and monthly rates, amenity packages, online review ratings (Google, Campspot, Good Sam, Hipcamp), seasonal availability, and any known expansion plans. KOA franchisees, state park campgrounds, Army Corps of Engineers parks, and national forest campgrounds all factor into the competitive landscape depending on the subject park’s positioning.

Demand is quantified from named sources: National Park Service visitation (323.0 million recreation visits (down 2.7 percent) and 13.0 million overnight stays (down 2.4 percent) in 2025, a year that included a 43-day shutdown), state park and Army Corps of Engineers attendance, FHWA and state DOT traffic counts on approach corridors, attraction and event calendars, and employer or construction-crew demand for longer stays. We separate highway pass-through demand from destination demand, inventory existing and permitted supply within drive time, and set the subject’s capture through fair share analysis by site type.

RV park and campground feasibility by format

• Destination RV resort. Demand is regional or national and rates are seasonal. The credit turns on amenity positioning and peak-season depth against named destination competitors, as in the Fredericksburg destination RV resort case study.
• Highway pass-through park. Demand follows corridor traffic and stopovers. Stays are short and rate-sensitive; the study tests capture against approach-corridor traffic counts and the nearest competing parks.
• Long-stay and snowbird park. Steady revenue, but the highest eligibility risk. A park that relies on monthly or seasonal guests can fall below the 50 percent transient line.
• Campground with cabins or glamping. This is the typical campground feasibility study: a higher revenue per acre, with a different demand radius and permitting path for structures.
• Franchised parks (KOA, Jellystone). The brand must be on the SBA Franchise Directory with the required certification on the date the loan number is assigned. The study models franchise fees and reservation-system contribution, following the franchise feasibility study approach.
• Acquisitions and expansions. Under SOP 50 10 8.1, acquisitions are tested on the seller’s history, and expansions of an existing operation at 1.15x. The study reconciles the seller’s revenue by stay type to the transient test. See expansion feasibility studies.

2026 market evidence for RV park credits

Every figure carries its source and period. The firm updates this section when a primary release changes the answer. Longer-form analysis appears in the SBA RV park and campground lending outlook for 2026 to 2028, including the transient revenue test, SOP 50 10 8.1 acquisition rules, rural fee relief and 7(a) versus 504 structuring, and lodging context appears in the U.S. hotel market report.

Operator rent mixes are shown for direction. The SBA test applies to the borrower’s total business revenue for the prior year.

Environmental scope is set out further in environmental due diligence for SBA feasibility studies.

RV park feasibility study vs market study vs appraisal

See also feasibility study vs appraisal vs market study and feasibility study vs business plan.

How RV parks are valued: appraisal methodology and standards

The feasibility study and the appraisal answer different questions, but in an SBA file they have to agree. The study tests whether the park can generate its projected cash flow through every season; the appraisal converts that cash flow into value and sets the collateral position.

The standards behind the file. The appraisal follows USPAP (2024 edition, which has no fixed expiration date) and, for federally regulated lenders, the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, which bar using going concern value as market value unless it is separately identified. Where a park is treated as special purpose, the appraisal is prepared by a Certified General appraiser with going-concern experience and allocates separate values to land, building, equipment and intangible assets. The Appraisal Institute’s dedicated text is Saia, Appraising Manufactured (Mobile) Home Communities and Recreational Vehicle Parks (Appraisal Institute, 2017).

Income approach. The primary approach. Stabilized net operating income is built by site type and season, separating transient, seasonal, and annual revenue, plus store, cabin, and ancillary income, less operating expenses, a market management fee, and replacement reserves. RV park expenses run far higher than manufactured housing communities because parks staff offices, clean bathhouses, and pay utilities; published RV park expense ratios are scarce, so the study normalizes seller statements against comparable parks and the subject’s staffing, utility and booking-platform costs, under the operating expense rationalization standard. Newmark’s 2026 survey reports Class A and B RV parks trading at going-in cap rates around 8.0% and Class C parks closer to 9.0%, with discount rates near 9.5 percent for Class A and B and about 10.5 percent for Class C (Newmark 2026 survey, as reported by BVWire, March 11, 2026); reserves run about $75 per pad, and RV parks trade at a 50–150 basis point premium to manufactured housing communities. A discounted cash flow captures ramp-up for new parks and expansions.

Transient versus annual income. Transient income behaves like lodging: higher rates, more volatility, more labor, and more dependence on management and booking platforms. Annual and long-term income behaves more like a land-lease community. Appraisers weigh the mix when selecting cap rates and expense levels, and the mix also drives the SBA transient revenue test, so the study and appraisal must use the same revenue breakdown.

Sales comparison approach. Comparable sales are analyzed on price per site and gross income multipliers, adjusted for transient versus annual mix, utility service (50-amp full hookups versus water and electric), season length, amenities, waterfront or destination location, condition of roads and septic systems, and expansion land. Broker rules of thumb are used only as rough checks.

Cost approach. Land value plus the replacement cost of pads, roads, utilities, septic, bathhouses, and buildings, less depreciation. It is a key test for new parks: if the stabilized value does not exceed total development cost with an adequate developer margin, the project is not financially feasible as proposed.

Business value and highest and best use. An operating RV park is a simple going concern: real estate plus a modest business component tied to management and transient operations. One accepted method values the real estate at a market rent and treats the operating business as what remains (Hyde, American Society of Appraisers). Every appraisal also tests highest and best use as vacant and as improved; for underperforming parks, alternatives such as residential lots or other recreational uses are weighed, subject to zoning, which often treats RV parks and manufactured housing communities differently. The feasibility study supplies the financially feasible test for continued park use.

SBA eligibility and structure checklist for RV park loans

Occupancy rules. Under 13 CFR 120.131, SBA requires the business to occupy 51 percent of an existing building and 60 percent of new construction, under both 7(a) and 504. For an RV park, the park operation itself constitutes the business use, so this requirement is typically met for the entire parcel. However, if the park includes residential units for on-site managers or leased commercial space (camp store operated by a third party), the occupancy calculation becomes more complex.

Land-intensive projects. RV parks require significantly more land per revenue dollar than most SBA-financed properties. A 100-site park may require 15 to 30 acres. The firm’s planning range for development cost is $20,000 to $80,000 per site, depending on utilities, roads and amenities; the most recent industry survey (ARVC, 2023, 22 respondents) found 60 percent of new full-hookup sites cost $15,000 or more and 20 percent $30,000 or more. Land cost is taken from local sales. Lenders compare total project cost (land plus improvements) with the stabilized income it supports, and land-heavy budgets draw extra scrutiny.

Compare program structures in the SBA 7(a) vs 504 feasibility guide, the CDC guide for 504 projects, and SBA equity injection sources.

Engaging the firm: process, fee and timeline

RV park studies are quoted at $4,900 to $15,000, fixed before work begins. The fee does not depend on the conclusion or on whether the loan closes. Traditional parks with straightforward layouts sit at the lower end. Mixed RV, cabin and glamping projects, destination parks needing regional demand analysis, and data-sparse markets sit at the upper end. Delivery runs 10 to 15 business days from a complete data response. For pricing across all property types, see the cost and timeline guide and what to expect in the report.

Data request checklist

• Site address, parcel and acreage.
• Site plan with site count by type (pull-through, back-in, water and electric, tent, cabin, glamping) and utility service.
• Development budget or purchase contract.
• Brand or franchise proposal, if any.
• Proposed loan structure, SBA program, and lender or CDC.
• For existing parks:
  • three years of P&L statements and tax returns;
  • reservation-system exports showing revenue and site nights by stay length (nightly, weekly, monthly, seasonal, annual) and by month;
  • rate history;
  • utility bills.
• Zoning, campground license, health and wastewater permits.
• Flood zone determination.
• Any appraisal or environmental report already in the file.
• Sponsor’s park operating experience.

RV park feasibility study FAQ

More answers: SBA feasibility study FAQ and the glossary. Background: what an SBA feasibility study is and SBA loan default rates by industry.

How this page is verified

Program rules are checked against 13 CFR Parts 120 and 121 and SBA SOP 50 10 8 and 8.1. Every market figure names its source and date. Last verified October 26, 2026.

Changelog