Spotlight on EB5AN’s Rural and Urban Projects in 2026: Highlights of Our Investor Interview Series

An EB-5 project has to satisfy two important goals: support an investor’s EB-5 immigration petition and allow the investor to recover their funds. Choosing between EB-5 projects means looking closely at both of these goals.

For example, a family who wants to gain their U.S. Green Cards as soon as possible may place the greatest weight on priority processing offered by rural EB-5 projects. But another investor may have more flexibility on timing and give greater consideration to the investment’s potential return.

EB5AN’s investor interview series shows how investors work through those decisions. In detailed conversations, they explain which projects they considered, what they found in the offering documents, and why they ultimately trusted a particular investment with their capital and their family’s plans.

For this installment, we revisit five interviews showcasing some of our most successful EB-5 projects in 2026. Ido from Israel and Shiv from India selected Bay Creek. Vinodh Ram, also from India, invested in Tamarack Resort.

Jeremy from Singapore chose Grand Park for his child’s application. All four selected rural projects.

And Kuba, a Polish-Canadian investor, chose the Brandon Multifamily equity project, an urban offering developed by The Kolter Group.

Each investor had different priorities, but each one also explored recurring themes: experienced project developers, full compliance with EB-5 program requirements, safe financial structures, and access to the information needed to evaluate risk.

They also explain why working with EB5AN gave them confidence to invest in each EB-5 project.

We invite you to watch the highlights video below to hear their experiences in their own words, then explore the main topics from their interviews.

Do rural EB-5 projects get priority processing?

Yes. Rural EB-5 projects receive priority processing of investor petitions, and Vinodh Ram’s I-526E petition for Tamarack Resort was approved in under five months without a request for evidence.

“I filed in August of 2025, and the petition was approved in the first week of January. So in less than five months, I got my 526E petition approved. Now I’m waiting for the rest of the petition to get approved. So this is a very positive outcome, getting the petition approved in less than five months from the filing date.” — Vinodh Ram

Vinodh’s experience with the Tamarack project provides a concrete example of a fast petition decision. He reported receiving I-526E approval in roughly five months, without a request for evidence. His employer-sponsored immigration route had involved a much longer anticipated wait, which had led him to consider rural EB-5 in the first place.

His experience shows why EB-5 investors with time-sensitive goals closely examine the rural category.

Rural EB-5 investments receive priority processing of investor petitions and qualify for a category reserved for 20% of EB-5 visas. Both benefits can be significant when a family is comparing immigration options.

Why do families with time-sensitive Green Card goals choose rural EB-5 projects?

“First of all, rural. I wanted to do rural because of the faster processing for those visas. […] And in here with Bay Creek, the other factors also help, where the loan term was shorter, which is similar to HUA projects that I have evaluated, and it was a faster processing. So made more sense to go with the rural, the Bay Creek project.” — Shiv

For Shiv, an Indian investor in Bay Creek, a fast Green Card approval had become a family concern. He had built a career in the United States, but his daughter was approaching the age at which she could lose eligibility to remain his dependent. Continuing to wait on an employment-based Green Card process did not give him the confidence he needed about her future.

Rural priority processing therefore became a key requirement in his project search. He also wanted a senior loan, prompt deployment of his capital, and a comparatively short loan term. Bay Creek appealed because it brought those characteristics together. He could pursue the immigration advantage he wanted within a financial structure he found suitable.

Does choosing a rural project mean accepting a weaker investment?

“But then we really liked the shortened timeline for processing. […] But then once we found a project to our liking, we said, ‘Okay, we have to go with rural, because we really do want to get the Green Card as soon as we can.’ That’s when we landed on Bay Creek.” — Ido

Ido’s path to Bay Creek began with a broader search for a way to relocate his family. He had already spent considerable time exploring other visas, including E-2. By the time he considered rural EB-5 projects, he wanted to move forward with a permanent-residency strategy that did not depend on operating his own business.

He initially associated a rural location with greater investment uncertainty. Examining Bay Creek’s developer, residential business, and existing activity changed that assessment. Once he found a rural project he was comfortable with financially, the potential immigration timing advantage became particularly compelling. His decision depended on both parts of that evaluation.

How investors verify EB5AN’s track record

“And from what I could tell, the projects are successful. And the complaints I could find online is something I would kind of expect for any type of real estate investment, like someone didn’t like something, but nothing really major. So I was like, this is a developer that has a lot of experience of doing these types of projects. And any negative feedback I can find is not really relevant to my investment approach here.” — Kuba

EB5AN invites that scrutiny. Kuba researched Kolter’s project history and complaint record independently, then compared the projected job creation with the number of investors before committing to the Brandon Multifamily Equity Project.

Kuba researched the developer with the same thorough approach he applied to regional centers. He searched for failed projects and serious complaints, looking for information that might challenge the investment case. His research into Kolter left him comfortable with its experience and history of executing comparable developments.

That conclusion helped him evaluate the Brandon Multifamily Equity Project, a 280-unit rental apartment community in Brandon, Florida. EB5AN and Kolter had already worked together on the Boynton Beach and Terra Ceia multifamily projects. For Kuba, that experience increased his confidence in the team’s ability to carry out another apartment development.

He also considered the underlying market. He had observed apartment oversupply in parts of the Nashville area near where he lived and understood that location could materially affect demand. He viewed Brandon’s apartment business favorably after considering the setting and the need for housing. His confidence came from evaluating the development itself, alongside the people responsible for delivering it.

Job creation is another crucial aspect of a strong EB-5 offering. Vinodh valued Tamarack’s job-creation cushion. Kuba compared projected jobs with the number of investors and the corresponding immigration requirements. He appreciated that EB5AN’s materials made those figures part of the project presentation.

“But I was definitely okay with what I saw in the summary and prospect of what’s predicted and how does it compare to the number of investments and needs for the job creation. I definitely appreciated how all of the projects from EB5AN, they make a specific point in bringing that up. Like this is how many investors we expect; this is how many jobs created they will need; and this is how much we design into the project itself, into the investment and what’s the safety margin that we have.” — Kuba

Each EB-5 investor must be credited with at least 10 full-time jobs. EB5AN’s project summaries state the expected number of investors, the jobs required for them, and the projected job-creation cushion above that requirement.

An investor needs enough information to distinguish jobs already supported by qualifying activity from jobs projected through future development. Project approval, construction progress, and job creation answer related but different questions. Reviewing them together helps explain what has already been accomplished and what the investment still depends on.

Similarly, Vinodh approached developer selection with specific questions. He wanted to know how long a developer had been operating, how many projects it had successfully completed, and whether it had a bankruptcy history. Those questions helped him assess the experience behind Tamarack before committing his funds.

While a business plan sets out what a project intends to achieve, a developer’s history gives investors evidence about its ability to execute. Relevant experience includes managing construction, responding to cost pressures, and bringing the finished product to market. A record of comparable projects can help investors assess those capabilities, even though it cannot guarantee the next outcome.

Why do EB-5 investors favor residential real estate projects?

“One more thing that we liked about Bay Creek is that it’s a residential project, because a lot of the other projects, we felt that if you’re investing in a commercial project, you have to be somewhat familiar with other aspects of the business with which we’re not necessarily familiar. And residential is something that we believe is safer in terms of demand, especially right now when so many people are on the move within the U.S. So they’re seeking high-quality housing and high-quality projects.” — Ido

For Ido, the type of real estate also mattered. He felt better able to assess housing demand than businesses that depended on unfamiliar commercial operations. He examined the local market and liked Bay Creek’s location. He also valued the fact that development was already underway and other investors had joined before him.

Bay Creek is an established master-planned community in Cape Charles, Virginia, with waterfront access, golf, and other amenities. Those existing features gave Ido a development he could research beyond its offering documents. His assessment combined the residential product, the market, the developer, and the progress already made.

(Our current Currahee Club rural EB-5 project follows a similar model to Bay Creek.)

Which EB-5 financial structure fits your priorities: senior loan or equity?

“Then senior loan was another criteria. And the deployment time was also very crucial, deployment time. […] That’s the main reason I would say I went with it, because it made my rural, senior loan, a fast deployment, and the loan duration was also relatively smaller compared to other projects which were there, and the partial investment. Those were the key things which made me pick Bay Creek.” — Shiv

Shiv wanted to understand where the EB-5 loan sat in the financing structure, how soon his funds would be deployed, and how long they would remain committed. A project could meet his immigration preferences and still be unsuitable if its financial terms did not fit his plans.

The senior-loan position was one reason Bay Creek stood out. Repayment priority affects how capital is treated if a project encounters financial difficulties. Investors evaluating that protection also need to understand the collateral, other obligations, and the terms governing enforcement. Shiv considered the loan position alongside the deployment schedule and loan duration, rather than treating any one feature as sufficient by itself.

The offering also accommodated the way he intended to fund his investment. Shiv invested in two installments and used self-directed IRA funds for part of the investment. Those arrangements were beneficial to his particular finances. Together with the project’s other terms, they helped him move from identifying an attractive offering to completing an EB-5 investment.

How much of a project’s financing should come from EB-5 capital?

“The second criteria is understanding the ratio of funds—how much the developer was bringing in through various means and how much the project is relying on the EB-5 funding itself. Any project that relies more than, I would say, 25% or 30% on the EB-5 funding, that would be a red flag for me. […] Right from the beginning, I was clear that I was more interested on a loan-based project than on an equity-based project.” — Vinodh Ram

Vinodh’s threshold: any project relying on EB-5 capital for more than 25%–30% of its total financing was a red flag. Tamarack Resort fell within his limit, and he chose its loan-based structure.

Vinodh had a different financial concern: how heavily a development depended on raising EB-5 capital. He compared the EB-5 portion of the financing with the funds the developer brought together through other sources. A project relying too heavily on EB-5 fundraising fell outside his personal comfort level.

His preference helped narrow the search that led to Tamarack. He wanted to evaluate a lending arrangement, its term, and the project’s ability to support repayment. He also asked direct questions about extensions, recognizing that an initial loan term and the full period permitted by the documents can differ.

Why choose EB-5 equity instead of a senior loan?

“And it came with two flavors, equity and senior loan—if I remember correctly, the other option. And comparing between them, I decided on the equity because of the potential rate of return on the investment, like freezing this amount of money for this amount of time. I would expect a return and not just a way to just get EB-5 visa through it.” — Kuba

Kuba placed more weight on investment earnings. Because a substantial amount of his capital would be committed for years, he considered the effect of that commitment on his broader savings. His choice of equity followed a detailed comparison of the potential return, expected duration, and risks.

He understood that equity involved a different risk position from lending. His assessment of Kolter and the project gave him sufficient confidence to accept that position in pursuit of a higher potential return. The difference between loan and equity structures was therefore key to his decision.

His immigration circumstances also allowed him to give the urban offering serious consideration. Born in Poland, he did not view a country-specific visa backlog as the decisive issue in his search. Rural versus urban was secondary to the investment characteristics he was comparing. This was his personal assessment, rather than a claim that the two categories have identical processing timelines.

These choices demonstrate the value of offering several investment structures. Shiv and Vinodh could focus on loan projects, while Kuba could pursue an equity investment consistent with his objectives.

Each reached a decision by considering the financial trade-offs that mattered most to him.

Why does Form I-956F approval matter when choosing an EB-5 project?

“We liked the fact it was a rural project, it had the approval, and it was ready Q1 to receive funds and to go live. And the Grand Park project seemed something sound and we’re comfortable to proceed on that basis. So it was a confluence of a few factors actually, somewhat sequentially, but our timeline was quite clear. So we sort of worked back a bit from that in helping our selection process.” — Jeremy

Jeremy approached project selection with a clear timetable. His children were studying in the United States, and he wanted to support their ability to remain and work after graduation. For the application discussed in his interview, he gifted the investment funds to one child, who was the applicant.

The family intended to file in April, so they needed a project prepared to receive funds during the first quarter. They also wanted rural status and an existing Form I-956F approval. Grand Park met those requirements. Jeremy described working backward from the intended filing date to narrow the options.

His approach highlights a practical aspect of project quality: readiness. Investors need an offering that can accommodate their investment schedule, with the documentation and subscription process available when their attorney is ready to proceed. An appealing project that cannot meet those needs may not fit the family’s timeline.

Vinodh also made Form I-956F approval an early screening factor. Some projects initially presented to him were still awaiting that decision. He wanted to avoid the additional uncertainty associated with pending project approval and looked for an offering whose project documents had already passed USCIS review.

Shiv weighed that issue differently when he invested in August 2025. Bay Creek’s I-956F approval was still pending at that point. He reviewed the project materials and consulted his legal team, taking EB5AN’s project-approval history into account.

Why did these investors choose EB5AN?

Does EB5AN require an NDA to share project information?

“Each one of the projects had a lot of detail to it that was openly available—no NDAs or anything. We had previously signed a couple of NDAs for some of the other regional centers that we were in touch with just for basic information. […] And then once we started the dialogue with you, we saw that you very freely provide us with answers, provide us with information that we need. Everything was readily available.” — Ido

Ido encountered a clear difference when comparing regional centers. He had been asked to sign nondisclosure agreements elsewhere just to receive basic information. With EB5AN, he could begin examining projects directly on the website, then obtain further answers through conversations with the team.

That access supported the detailed comparison he and his brother wanted to conduct. They could review several project types and locations, develop questions, and move forward when they were ready. The breadth of the portfolio also mattered: Ido felt some competing firms concentrated on a smaller selection of projects that did not fit his preferences.

Kuba similarly began by examining how much substantive information a regional center made available. He read extensive project materials and followed EB5AN’s webinars. That research helped him assess both the offerings and the team’s familiarity with developments affecting EB-5 investors.

Vinodh received the documents he requested and valued access to sales and progress reporting. EB5AN also offered him the opportunity to visit the development before committing. Transparency had practical value in each case: investors could examine the basis for the claims being made and pursue questions of their own.

Will EB5AN give candid answers about loan terms and risk?

“He said any builder would want to maximize the loan term to ensure that they have enough time to repay the investors. […] He was quite transparent, candid, and I really liked that approach. And I didn’t see the same level of transparencies with other RCs that I engaged with.” — Vinodh Ram

Vinodh gave a specific example involving Tamarack’s loan term. He asked Jordan from EB5AN whether he could exit after the initial four years instead of remaining through the potential one-year extensions. Jordan explained that a developer could use the extensions allowed by the agreement. He did not present the initial term as an assured exit date.

That answer gave Vinodh a more realistic basis for assessing the investment. He could consider the full potential commitment before subscribing, which he valued more than an unrealistic description of when repayment might occur.

Shiv described the same quality in his conversations with Jordan. He appreciated explanations that addressed downside scenarios and the broader EB-5 process. Their discussions continued across months of research, source-of-funds preparation, and subsequent steps:

“So right from the very early exploration, I was engaging with Jordan. Then during the due diligence process, during subsequent steps, and even for post-investment, I think it continued. It was not a one-off sales pitch or anything like that. It was very much a relationship—I would say sustained relationship.” — Shiv

How responsive is EB5AN before and after you invest?

“And I got all of the answers in the call. It wasn’t like, ‘Let me get back to you.’ It was always like, ‘Okay, these are the numbers, these are the facts, this is what happened,’ which is, again, another de-risking and confidence-building exercise that the person you talk to knows a lot, if not all, about the ongoing and past projects. And they can tell in much detail of what happened and where are we at.” — Kuba

Kuba came to his discussions with detailed questions. He valued speaking with someone who could explain the numbers, project history, and current position during the conversation. That command of the facts helped him judge the depth of the team responsible for the investment.

“You responded quickly. We had a few engaging calls with Jordan. He seemed sincere and forthcoming, and we felt comfortable dealing with him and your regional center.” — Jeremy

Jeremy emphasized responsiveness and sincerity in his conversations with Jordan. His questions about the offering were answered, and the onboarding team gave clear instructions once the family chose Grand Park. Jeremy recalled being advised to send a small test wire before transferring the full investment, an attention to detail he appreciated when moving substantial funds.

The communication continued after subscription through periodic updates. For Jeremy, that follow-through helped connect the initial project decision with the ongoing experience of being an investor.

“Investment is always a risk and I’m not a normal real estate investor. So anything that gives me more confidence is always a plus. […] Yeah, I would definitely recommend due to the level of professionalism, knowledge and experience. And it makes me sleep better knowing that I went with EB5AN.” — Kuba

Kuba’s comment above captures the confidence these investors described after completing their research: they understood the project they had selected and trusted the people answering their questions.

Find the EB5AN Project That Fits Your Goals

These five investors arrived at EB-5 with different circumstances. Some were planning around their children’s futures. Others wanted greater independence from an employer or a business. Their project decisions reflected those needs, together with their expectations for financial safety.

For anyone beginning the EB-5 process, their interviews provide a useful starting point for asking informed questions. The next step is to apply those questions to your own circumstances and the projects available when you are ready to invest. EB-5 capital is put at risk, and the right decision requires understanding the particular offering’s terms and your individual immigration goals.

To discuss your goals and explore EB5AN’s rural and urban projects, schedule a free consultation with our team.