The following executive summary is intended to provide a broad overview of the items that you will find elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. As this is only a summary, we encourage you to read the entire Proxy Statement for more information about these topics prior to voting.

Annual Meeting of Stockholders

Meeting Agenda and Voting Matters

Director Nominees (Proposal No. 1)

Each director nominee is elected annually by a majority of votes cast (see pages 9 through 12 of this Proxy Statement for further detail).

Charter Amendment to Eliminate Supermajority Voting Requirements (Proposal No. 2)

Advisory Resolution To Approve Executive Compensation (Proposal No. 3)

Performance Highlights

2013 Compensation Decisions

The table below highlights the 2013 total compensation decisions for each Named Executive Officer (see pages 21-42 of this Proxy Statement for additional detail):

Alignment of Pay with Performance

Auditors (Proposal No. 4)

We are requesting that the stockholders ratify the appointment of the Company’s independent registered accounting firm for 2014. The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2014.

If your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record, you will receive instructions from the holder of record. You must follow the instructions of the holder of record in order for your shares to be voted. Telephone and Internet proxy authorization also will be offered to stockholders owning shares through certain banks and brokers. If your shares are not registered in your own name and you plan to vote your shares in person at the Meeting, you should contact your broker or agent to obtain a legal proxy or broker’s proxy card and bring it to the Meeting in order to vote.

If you authorize a proxy to vote your shares, the individuals named on the proxy card or authorized by you by telephone or Internet (your “proxies”) will vote your shares in the manner you indicate. If you sign and return the proxy card or authorized your proxies by telephone or Internet without indicating your instructions, your shares will be voted as follows:

FOR the election of all nominees for director (see Proposal 1); FOR the approval of an amendment to the Company’s Charter to eliminate supermajority voting requirements (see Proposal 2); FOR the advisory resolution to approve the Company’s executive compensation (see Proposal 3); FOR the ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting

firm for 2014 (see Proposal 4); and in the discretion of the proxy holder on any other matter that may properly come before the Meeting.

To be voted, proxies must be filed with the Secretary of the Company prior to the Meeting. Proxies may be revoked at any time before exercise at the Meeting (i) by filing a notice of such revocation with the Secretary of the Company, (ii) by filing a later-dated proxy with the Secretary of the Company or (iii) by voting in person at the Meeting. Dissenting stockholders will not have rights of appraisal with respect to any matter to be acted upon at the Meeting.

If you own shares through a broker or other nominee in street name, you may instruct your broker or other nominee as to how to vote your shares (at least ten days prior to the Meeting). A “broker non-vote” occurs when you fail to provide a broker or other nominee with voting instructions and a broker or other nominee does not have the discretionary authority to vote your shares on a particular matter because the matter is not a routine matter under the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules. Broker non-votes and abstentions will be counted for purposes of calculating whether a quorum is present at the Meeting. The vote required for each proposal is listed below:

With respect to Proposal 1, you may vote FOR all nominees, WITHHOLD your vote as to all nominees, or vote FOR all nominees except those specific nominees from whom you WITHHOLD your vote. A properly executed proxy marked WITHHOLD with respect to the election of one or more directors will not be voted with respect to the director or directors indicated. The nominees receiving the majority of votes cast will be elected as directors (i.e., the number of shares voted for a director must exceed the number of votes withheld for that director).

With respect to Proposals 2, 3 and 4, you may vote FOR, AGAINST or ABSTAIN. If you ABSTAIN from voting on Proposal 2, the abstention will have the same effect as a vote AGAINST the Proposal. If you ABSTAIN from voting on Proposals 3 or 4, the abstention will have no effect because it will not be a vote cast.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules permit us to deliver a single Notice of Internet Availability or set of

Meeting materials to one address shared by two or more of our stockholders. We have delivered only one Proxy Statement and annual report to multiple stockholders who share an address, unless we received contrary instructions from the impacted stockholders prior to the mailing date. We will promptly deliver, upon written or oral request, a separate copy of the Notice of Internet Availability or Meeting materials, as requested, to any stockholder at the shared address to which a single copy of those documents was delivered. If you prefer to receive separate copies of the Proxy Statement or annual report, contact Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. at 1-800-542-1061 or in writing at Broadridge, Householding Department, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. If you are currently a stockholder sharing an address with another stockholder and are receiving more than one Proxy Statement and annual report and wish to receive only one copy of future Notices of Internet Availability, proxy statements and annual reports for your household, please contact Broadridge at the above phone number or address.

The Company’s Bylaws, as amended (the “Bylaws”), provide that all directors be elected at each annual meeting of stockholders. Our Board of Directors is currently comprised of nine directors. The persons named as proxies in the accompanying form of proxy intend to vote in favor of the election of the nine nominees for director designated below to serve until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their respective successors are duly elected and qualify. It

is expected that each of these nominees will be able to serve, but if any such nominee is unable to serve, the proxies may vote for another person nominated by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and approved by the Board of Directors or the Board of Directors may, to the extent permissible by the Bylaws, reduce the number of directors to be elected at the Meeting.

Milton Cooper, age 85, is the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Company. Mr. Cooper served as the Chairman of the Board of Directors and CEO of the Company from November 1991 to December 2009. In addition, Mr. Cooper was Director and President of the Company for more than five years prior to November 1991. In 1960, Mr. Cooper, along with a partner, founded the Company’s predecessor. Mr. Cooper led the Company through its IPO and growth over the past five decades. In addition, Mr. Cooper received a National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) Industry Leadership Award for his significant and lasting contributions to the REIT industry. Mr. Cooper is also a Director at Getty Realty Corporation. Mr. Cooper graduated from City College in New York and Brooklyn Law School.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• Mr. Cooper co-founded the Company and helps maintain the Company’s continuing commitment to its core values of integrity, creativity and stability. Mr. Cooper’s service on the Board of Directors allows the Company to preserve its distinctive culture and history.
   
• Mr. Cooper’s reputation within the NAREIT community and among the Company’s business partners contributes significantly to the Company’s continued leadership in the REIT industry.
   
• Mr. Cooper’s ability to communicate, encourage and foster diverse discussions of the Company’s business, together with his five decades of executive leadership experience, make Mr. Cooper a highly effective Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors.

Philip E. Coviello, age 71, has been a Director of the Company since May 2008 and currently serves on the Audit, Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. Mr. Coviello was a partner at Latham & Watkins

LLP, an international law firm, until his retirement from that firm in 2003. In addition, since 1996, Mr. Coviello has been a Director of Getty Realty Corporation, where he serves as Chair of the Audit Committee and as a member of its Compensation and Governance and Nominating Committees. Mr. Coviello holds an A.B. from Princeton University, an L.L.B. from the Columbia University School of Law and an M.B.A. from the Columbia University School of Business.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• 35 years of experience counseling Boards of Directors and senior management as a corporate lawyer on a wide range of corporate governance, regulatory compliance and other issues that affect public companies.
   
• Decades of experience as both issuers’ and underwriters’ counsel in capital markets transactions and heavy involvement in the presentation and analysis of hundreds of audited financial statements, pro forma financial statements and SEC filings, including representing the Company in its initial public offering.
   
• Mr. Coviello’s contributions to the Company’s Audit Committee are bolstered by his service as Chair of the Audit Committee of Getty Realty Corporation, where Mr. Coviello oversees the work of Getty’s Chief Accounting Officer, directly interfaces with Getty’s independent registered public accounting firm and is involved with Getty’s Sarbanes-Oxley internal controls compliance work.

Richard G. Dooley, age 84, has been a Director of the Company since December 1991. Mr. Dooley currently serves as the Lead Independent Director, the Chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and a member of the Audit and Executive Compensation Committees. From 1993 to 2003, Mr. Dooley was a consultant to, and from 1978 to 1993 served as the Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer of the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company. Mr. Dooley

is a Director, Chair of the Compensation Committee, and member of the Audit and Corporate Governance Committees of Jefferies LLC (formerly Jefferies Group, Inc.), a subsidiary of Leucadia National Corporation (“Leucadia”) (NYSE: LUK) pursuant to a merger between Leucadia and Jefferies Group, Inc. effective March 1, 2013. Mr. Dooley formerly served as a Director and member of the Compensation Committee of Leucadia. Mr. Dooley holds a B.S. degree from Northeastern University and an M.B.A. from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• Expertise in corporate strategy development, organizational development and operational and corporate governance issues arising in complex organizations.
   
• Familiarity with Sarbanes-Oxley compliance, internal auditing and financial controls issues and extensive financial expertise and experience with public accounting matters for global organizations.
   
• Responsibility for portfolio investing in a wide variety of real estate properties and developments as Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer of the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, bringing to the Company both executive leadership and real estate investment experience.
   
• Expertise as a Chartered Financial Analyst and investment professional with decades of experience in analyzing and evaluating financial statements.

Joe Grills, age 79, has been a Director of the Company since January 1997 and is the Chair of the Executive Compensation Committee and a member of the Audit and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. Mr. Grills was employed by IBM from 1961 to 1993 and held various positions in financial management in both IBM’s domestic and international businesses. Mr. Grills served as a member (1994-2007) and Co-Chairman of the Board of Directors (2002-2007) of a cluster of BlackRock (Merrill Lynch) Mutual Funds from 1994 to 2007. He was a Director, was Vice Chairman, was Chairman and is currently Chairman Emeritus of the Montpelier Foundation. He is on the Investment Advisory Committee of the Virginia Retirement System, Vice Chairman (2002-2005) and Chairman (2005-2009). In addition, Mr. Grills is a Trustee and Chairman of the Investment Committee of the Woodberry Forest School, a Trustee and Member (Chairman 2007-2011) of the Investment Committee of the National Trust for Historic Preservation (on Finance Committee) and a Director of National Main Street Center, Inc., a subsidiary of National Trust for Historic Preservation (Feb. 2013). Mr. Grills is on the Individual Investment Advisory Committee of the NYSE. He is a former Chairman and member of the Committee on Investment of Employee Benefit Assets of the Association of Financial Professionals. Mr. Grills also participates in research

and study sponsored by 20/20 Investment Association. Mr. Grills holds a B.A. from Duke University and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• Experience as IBM’s Chief Investment Officer of the IBM Retirement Fund with wide-ranging expertise in domestic and international financial matters and strategic deliberations.
   
• Extensive experience with internal audit and business controls while at IBM and on other audit committees.
   
• Extensive service on boards of directors and memberships on board committees in diverse corporate and non-profit organizations with broad and deep familiarity with corporate governance and executive oversight matters.
   
• Experience in compensation matters through wide advisory capacities and exposure to current executive compensation trends.

David B. Henry, age 65, has been the CEO of the Company since December 31, 2009, President since December 2008 and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors since April 2001. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Henry was the Chief Investment Officer of G.E. Capital Real Estate since 1997 and has held various positions at G.E. Capital for more than five years prior to 1997. Mr. Henry is also a director of Fairfield County Bank, a Connecticut mutual savings bank and a director and Chairman of the Compensation Committee of HCP, Inc. (NYSE: HCP). Mr. Henry is the former Chairman and currently a Trustee of the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) and is currently on the Executive Committee of the Board of Governors of NAREIT. Mr. Henry graduated from Bucknell University with a B.S. in Business Administration and received his M.B.A. from the University of Miami.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• Day-to-day leadership, as CEO of the Company, with a valuable perspective on the overall strategic execution of the Company.
   
• Service for 10 years as the Company’s Chief Investment Officer and leadership in the Company’s investment management process, portfolio reviews, new business initiatives and employee communication efforts.
   
• 23 years of experience at G.E. Capital Real Estate, serving the last 5 years as Chief Investment Officer/Senior Vice President and Chairman of G.E. Capital Investment Advisors.
   
• Experience on the senior management team for real estate investments totaling more than $20.0 billion in 11 countries worldwide in his role at G.E. Capital.

• Service as a Trustee and former Chairman of the ICSC, Vice Chairman and member of Executive Committee of the Board of Governors of NAREIT and member of The Real Estate Roundtable, provides the Board of Directors with a global understanding of REITs and current industry and market trends.

F. Patrick Hughes, age 66, has been a Director of the Company since October 2003. Mr. Hughes is currently the Chair of the Audit Committee and a member of the Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. Mr. Hughes is a Certified Public Accountant. Mr. Hughes has been the President of Hughes & Associates, LLC since October 2003. In addition, Mr. Hughes was a Director for Nottingham Properties, Inc. from 2001 to 2007 and Chairman of the Board of Directors from 2006 to 2007. Mr. Hughes previously served as the CEO, President and Trustee of Mid-Atlantic Realty Trust from its formation in 1993 to 2003. Mr. Hughes is also a Trustee of the State Retirement and Pension System of Maryland and serves as Vice Chairman of its Investment Committee and is Chairman of its Audit Committee. Mr. Hughes also serves on the Board of Directors of the John Hopkins Prostate Cancer Advisory Board and as the Chair on the Advisory Board for the John Hopkins University Real Estate Institute. Since May 2012, Mr. Hughes has served on the Society of St. Sulpice-Financial Advisory Board. (Mr. Hughes previously served on the Board from 1982 to 2009). Mr. Hughes served on the Board of Directors of Hoffberger Holdings, LLC from 2001 to 2008 and St. Ignatius Loyola Academy 1994 to 2009. Mr. Hughes earned his B.A. from Loyola University in Maryland and his Executive M.B.A. from the Sellinger School of Business in Baltimore, Maryland.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• 40 years of progressive commercial real estate experience.
   
• Financial expertise and extensive experience with capital markets transactions and investments in both public and private companies.
   
• Experience as the founder and CEO of Mid-Atlantic Realty Trust provided Mr. Hughes with real estate industry and entrepreneurial experience which allows him to evaluate the Company’s business climate, strategy and new business opportunities.

Frank Lourenso, age 73, has been a Director of the Company since December 1991. Mr. Lourenso is currently a member of the Audit, Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. Mr. Lourenso was an Executive Vice President of JPMorgan Chase & Co. (“J.P. Morgan,” and successor by merger to The Chase Manhattan Bank and Chemical Bank, N.A.) from 1990 until his retirement in June 2013. Mr. Lourenso was a Senior Vice President of J.P. Morgan for more than five years prior to 1990. Mr. Lourenso is a member of the Board of Trustees of

St. Joseph’s College. Mr. Lourenso holds a B.B.A. and an M.B.A. from Baruch College.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• Executive Vice President of J.P. Morgan, one of the world’s leading financial services firms with global scale and reach, bringing to the Board of Directors the perspective of a financial executive with exposure to a wide array of economic, social and corporate governance issues.
   
• Extensive experience with capital markets matters in the real estate industry and a key contributor to the Board of Directors’ strategic liquidity and capital discussions.
   
• Expertise in management oversight and financial matters relating to complex global organizations.

Colombe M. Nicholas, age 69, has been a Director of the Company since May 2011. Ms. Nicholas is currently a member of the Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. Ms. Nicholas has served as a consultant since 2002 to Financo Global Consulting, the international consulting division of Financo, Inc., focusing on identifying expansion opportunities and providing growth advice to companies. Ms. Nicholas’ retail experience includes Bonwit Teller, Bloomingdale’s and R.H. Macy. From the 1980s to 2000, Ms. Nicholas has served as President and CEO of Anne Klein Group, President and CEO of the Orr Felt Company, President and Chief Operating Officer of Giorgio Armani Fashion Corporation and President and CEO of Christian Dior New York. While at Christian Dior New York, Ms. Nicholas led sales growth from $125 million to $425 million. Ms. Nicholas has previously served on the Board of Directors of Oakley, Inc., The Mills Corporation and Tandy Brand. Ms. Nicholas currently serves on the Board of Directors of Herbalife International. Ms. Nicholas has a B.A. from the University of Dayton, a J.D. from the University of Cincinnati College of Law and an honorary doctorate in business administration from Bryant College of Rhode Island.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• Over 15 years of experience in the retail industry in various executive positions provides familiarity and a broad understanding of the operation of retail shopping centers.
   
• Experience as President and CEO at major licensing, apparel and accessory manufacturing corporations provides insight into management’s day to day actions and responsibilities related to sales of those products.
   
• Experience through service on other public company boards of directors and knowledge of corporate governance best practices in publicly-traded companies in today’s business environment.

Richard B. Saltzman, age 57, has been a Director of the Company since July 2003. Mr. Saltzman is a member of the Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. Mr. Saltzman has served since May 2003 as the President of Colony Capital LLC, a global real estate investment management firm where Mr. Saltzman shares responsibility for the firm’s global operations and guides the strategic planning, acquisition and asset management activities of Colony and oversees new business initiatives. Mr. Saltzman has been the CEO, President and a Director of Colony Financial Inc. (NYSE: CLNY) since September 2009. Prior to joining Colony Capital LLC, Mr. Saltzman was a Managing Director and Vice Chairman of Merrill Lynch’s investment banking division and held various other positions at Merrill Lynch for more than five years prior to that time. Mr. Saltzman has a B.A. from Swarthmore College and an M.S. from Carnegie-Mellon University.

Key experience and qualifications to serve on the Board of Directors include:

• More than 30 years of experience in real estate, including investing as a principal and as an investment manager, capital markets and investment banking.
   
• Significant experience with REITs, including initial public offerings, other capital markets products and mergers and acquisitions.
   
• More than 20 years of direct experience interacting in various capacities with the Company.

Nominees for director shall be elected by a majority of the votes cast in person or by proxy at the Meeting. A majority of the votes cast means the affirmative vote of a majority of the total votes cast “for” and “against” such nominee. Withheld votes will be treated as votes against the nominee. For

purposes of the election of directors, abstentions and broker non-votes, if any, will not be counted as votes cast and will have no effect on the result of the vote.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE NOMINEES SET FORTH IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT.

Term of Office. All directors of the Company serve terms of one year and until the election and qualification of their respective successors.

Attendance at Board of Directors and Committee Meetings and 2013 Annual Meeting. The Board of Directors met 8 times in person or telephonically in 2013. Attendance at Board and Committee meetings during 2013 averaged over 97% for directors as a group, and no director attended fewer than 87% of the aggregate of the total meetings of the Board and of the Committees on which each director serves. All of the directors were in attendance at the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on April 30, 2013. Our director attendance policy is included in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which are available on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

Communications with Directors. The Audit Committee and the non-management directors welcome anyone who has a concern about the Company’s conduct or policies, or any employee who has a concern about the Company’s

accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, to communicate that concern directly to the Board of Directors, the Lead Independent Director, the non-management directors or the Audit Committee. Such communications may be confidential or anonymous, and may be submitted in writing to the Board of Directors, the Lead Independent Director or the non-management directors by sending a letter by mail addressed to the Board of Directors, the Lead Independent Director or the non-management directors c/o Secretary of the Company, Kimco Realty Corporation, 3333 New Hyde Park Road, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042-0020. The Board of Directors has designated Richard G. Dooley as its Lead Independent Director to review these communications and present them to the entire Board of Directors or forward them to the appropriate directors. In addition, the Company maintains an Ethics Helpline, as further discussed in the Company’s Code of Conduct, which allows employees to submit concerns anonymously via phone or the Internet.

Our Board of Directors has adopted a formal set of categorical independence standards for directors. These categorical standards specify the criteria by which the independence of our directors will be determined, including guidelines for directors and their immediate families with respect to past employment or affiliation with the Company or its independent registered public accounting firm. These categorical standards meet, and in some areas exceed, the listing standards of the NYSE. The Board of Directors’ categorical standards are available along with our Corporate Governance Guidelines on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

In accordance with these categorical standards and the NYSE listing standards, the Board of Directors undertook its annual review of the independence of its directors on February 4, 2014. During this review, the Board of Directors considered transactions and relationships between each director or members of his or her immediate family and the Company. The Board of Directors also considered whether there were any transactions or relationships between directors or members of their immediate family (or any entity of which a director or an immediate family member is an executive officer, general partner or significant equity holder). The purpose of this review was to determine whether any such

relationships or transactions existed that were inconsistent with a determination that the director is independent.

As a result of this review, the Board of Directors affirmatively determined that the following nominees for director are independent of the Company and its management under the standards set forth in the categorical standards and the NYSE listing standards:

In making these determinations, the Board of Directors considered the relationships and transactions described under the caption “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” beginning on page 43.

In addition, none of the directors’ family members serves as an executive officer, as defined by Rule 3b-7 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“executive officer”) of the Company.

Board Leadership Structure. The Board of Directors has separated the roles of the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors and the CEO in recognition of the differences between the two roles. The CEO is responsible for setting the strategic direction for the Company and the day-to-day leadership and performance of the Company, while the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors provides guidance to the CEO, establishes the agenda for Board of Directors meetings in consultation with the CEO and presides over meetings of the full Board of Directors. Because Mr. Cooper, the Executive Chairman, is an employee of the Company and is therefore not “independent,” the Board of Directors has appointed the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, Richard G. Dooley, as Lead Independent Director to preside at all executive sessions of “non-management” directors, as defined under the NYSE Listed Company Manual.

Stock Ownership Guidelines. The Board of Directors adopted revised stock ownership guidelines in July 2012 for non-employee directors and executive officers that require each non-employee director and executive officer to own shares of

our Common Stock. Under the guidelines, all current non-employee directors must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to five times the annual Board of Directors retainer. Executive officers must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to a certain multiple of his or her base salary. Our Executive Chairman must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to five times base salary, our CEO must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to five times base salary, our Chief Operating Officer must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to three times base salary, and our Chief Financial Officer must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to two times base salary. Equity interests that count toward the satisfaction of the ownership guidelines include shares owned outright, shares jointly owned, restricted shares and shares held in a 401(k) retirement plan. Directors and executive officers have five years from the date they become a member of the Board of Directors or an executive officer to attain these ownership levels or until December 31, 2014 to meet the ownership levels, whichever is later. We believe that all of our directors and executive officers are currently in compliance with the stock ownership requirements.

Director Continuing Education. The Company maintains a formal program of continuing education for directors. In 2013, directors participated in customized Company-sponsored sessions on business-related topics, corporate governance matters, SEC rule changes, and other current topics such as cyber security, including issues applicable to particular committees of the Board of Directors. These sessions included detailed presentations on these matters and discussions on each of the covered topics.

Clawback Policy. The Company may seek repayment of cash and equity incentive compensation paid to named executive officers (“NEOs”) in the event of a material misstatement of the Company’s financial results where an NEO engaged in actual fraud or willful unlawful misconduct that materially contributed to the need to restate. Where the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors determines that these circumstances exist, the Committee may direct the Company to recover the after-tax portion of the difference between the compensation actually paid or awarded and the compensation calculated using the restated financial statements, based upon the Committee’s view of all relevant facts and circumstances and the best interests of the Company.

Risk Oversight. Our Board of Directors oversees an enterprise-wide approach to risk management, designed to support the achievement of organizational objectives, including strategic objectives, to improve long-term organizational performance and enhance stockholder value. A fundamental part of risk management is not only understanding the risks a company faces and what steps management is taking to manage those risks, but also understanding what level of risk is appropriate for the Company. Management is responsible for establishing our business strategy, identifying and assessing the related risks and establishing appropriate risk management practices. Our Board of Directors reviews our business strategy and management’s assessment of the related risk, and discusses with management the appropriate level of risk for the Company.

Our Board of Directors administers its risk oversight function with respect to our operating risk as a whole, and meets with management at least quarterly to receive updates with respect to our operations, business strategies and the monitoring of related risks. The Board of Directors also delegates oversight to the Audit, Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees to oversee selected elements of risk:

• Our Audit Committee selects and engages our independent registered public accounting firm and oversees financial risk exposures, including monitoring the integrity of the financial statements, internal controls over financial reporting and the independence of the independent auditor of the Company. The Audit Committee receives a risk and internal controls assessment report from the Company’s internal auditors on at least an annual basis and more frequently as appropriate. The Audit Committee also assists the Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibility with respect to compliance with legal and regulatory matters related to the Company’s financial statements and meets quarterly with our financial management, independent auditors and legal advisors for updates on risks related to our financial reporting function. The Audit Committee also monitors our whistleblower hot line with respect to financial reporting matters. The Audit Committee also oversees financial, credit and liquidity risk by working with our treasury function to evaluate elements of financial and credit risk and advises on our financial strategy, capital structure and long-term liquidity needs, and the implementation of risk mitigating strategies. Individuals who supervise day-to-day risk in this area have direct access to the Board of Directors, and the Company’s Chief Financial Officer meets regularly with our Audit Committee to discuss and advises on elements of risks related to our credit risk and function. The Audit Committee also oversees risk by working with management to adopt and reviewing annually a code of ethics designed to support the highest standards of business ethics.
   
• Our Executive Compensation Committee oversees risk management by participating in the creation of compensation structures that create incentives that support an appropriate level of risk-taking behavior consistent with the Company’s business strategy.
   
• Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee oversees governance related risks by working with management to establish corporate governance guidelines applicable to the Company, including recommendations regarding director nominees, the determination of director independence, Board of Directors leadership structure and membership on Board of Directors Committees.

Our Board of Directors and Committees’ risk oversight responsibilities are discussed further in “Committees of the Board of Directors” below.

Audit Committee. The Audit Committee currently consists of Mr. Hughes, who is Chair of the Audit Committee, and Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills and Lourenso, all of whom are independent directors. Six meetings of the Audit Committee were held in person or telephonically during 2013. Messrs. Hughes, Coviello, Dooley, Grills and Lourenso are each an “audit committee financial expert,” as determined by the Board of Directors in accordance with Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K, and Messrs. Hughes, Coviello, Dooley, Grills and Lourenso are “independent” from the Company as defined by the current listing standards of the NYSE.

The Audit Committee assists the Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities as related to the Company’s risk management processes. The Board of Directors and Audit Committee oversee (i) the integrity of the Company’s financial statements and financial reporting process and the Company’s systems of internal accounting and financial controls; (ii) the performance of the internal audit function; (iii) the annual independent integrated audit of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting, the engagement of the independent registered public accounting firm and the evaluation of the independent registered public accounting firm’s qualifications, independence and performance; (iv) policy standards and guidelines for risk assessment and risk management; (v) the Company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, including the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures; and (vi) the fulfillment of the other responsibilities set out in the Audit Committee Charter, as adopted by the Board of Directors. The Audit Committee receives regular reports from management regarding the Company’s assessment of risks. In addition, the Audit Committee reports regularly to the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors and Audit Committee focus on the Company’s general

risk management strategy, and also ensure that risks undertaken by the Company are consistent with the business strategies approved by the Board of Directors. While the Board of Directors oversees the Company’s risk management, management is responsible for the day-to-day risk management processes and reports directly to both the Board of Directors and Audit Committee on a regular basis and more frequently as appropriate. The Board of Directors believes this division of responsibilities is an effective approach for addressing the risks facing the Company.

The Audit Committee works with management to adopt and reviews annually a code of ethics designed to support the highest standards of business ethics. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter, as amended, adopted by the Board of Directors. A copy of the Audit Committee Charter, as amended, and the Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code of Ethics”) is available on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

Executive Compensation Committee. The Executive Compensation Committee currently consists of Mr. Grills, who is Chair of the Executive Compensation Committee, and Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Hughes, Lourenso and Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas, all of whom are independent directors. The Board of Directors has established an Executive Compensation Committee to: (i) evaluate (in consultation with management or the Board of Directors) and recommend to the Board of Directors for approval the compensation plans, policies and programs of the Company, especially those regarding executive compensation; and (ii) determine and recommend to the Board of Directors for approval the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer and all other executive officers of the Company.

More specifically, the Executive Compensation Committee annually reviews and approves corporate goals and objectives relevant to the total direct compensation of the CEO including changes in base salary, bonus payments and equity awards. For other NEOs, the Executive Compensation Committee reviews their performance against these goals and objectives and, based on its evaluation, approves their total direct compensation. The details of the processes and procedures involved are described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 21.

Five meetings of the Executive Compensation Committee were held in person or telephonically during 2013. The Executive Compensation Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board of Directors. A copy of the Executive Compensation Committee Charter is on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

The Board of Directors and Executive Compensation Committee, in consultation with management, have reviewed the design and operation of the Company’s incentive compensation arrangements, including the performance objectives and target levels used in connection with incentive awards, and evaluated the relationship between the Company’s risk management policies and practices and these arrangements. As a result of this review, management has determined, and the Board of Directors has affirmed management’s determination, that the Company’s compensation policies and practices are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company because they do not encourage the Company’s employees to take excessive or unnecessary risks. The Executive Compensation Committee believes that the combination of the Company’s (i) balanced approach to compensation, (ii) reliance on a variety of performance measures and (iii) use of both quantitative and qualitative assessments of performance reflected in the Company’s compensation program is consistent with the Company’s objectives and risk profile. Accordingly, the performance objectives in the Company’s annual incentive compensation plan are balanced with those contained in the Company’s long-term incentive compensation plan to ensure that both are aligned and consistent with the Company’s long-term business plan. The Company’s mix of equity-based awards has been allocated to ensure an appropriate combination of incentive and retention objectives, and the Company has established stock ownership guidelines to ensure that the interests of the Company’s executive officers are aligned with the interests of the Company’s stockholders.

In reaching its conclusion that the Company’s compensation policies and practices do not encourage excessive and unnecessary risk taking, the Executive Compensation Committee considered several factors including salaries, bonuses and equity awards. The Company’s benefits and retirement plans are not linked to performance. There is an annual performance-based bonus program for employees that

provides a discretionary award based on their respective level in the Company, individual performance and overall Company performance. While the Company’s bonus program for its leasing personnel is tied to personal production for new lease deals and renewals, management is comfortable that this bonus opportunity fairly incentivizes leasing personnel without being excessive. In addition, executive bonuses and equity awards are based on certain performance measures (established by the Executive Compensation Committee and management) including, but not limited to, funds from operations, results from operations, contributions from real estate investment programs, other financial considerations, individual performance and enterprise-wide performance. The Company’s long-term equity awards consist primarily of performance shares, restricted stock and stock options. These awards are intended to further link recipients’ interests with stockholder interests. The Company’s Executive Severance Plan with its NEOs and certain members of management provides severance protections. Since there are no performance-based aspects of these severance arrangements, and the Company generally retains the ability to terminate an executive “for cause” without triggering severance, the Executive Compensation Committee does not believe these agreements encourage excessive risk-taking. The Executive Compensation Committee believes that it is not overly reliant on any single measure of performance and assesses actual results against each performance measure as well as taking into account overall performance compared to targets. In addition to the quantitative performance measures, the Executive Compensation Committee also assesses the broader business environment and relative performance of the Company to evaluate individual performance. Finally, the Executive Compensation Committee considers changes in the business, industry and capital markets environment in determining compensation policies and practices.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee currently consists of Mr. Dooley, who is Chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and Messrs. Coviello, Grills, Hughes, Lourenso and Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas, all of whom are independent directors. The functions of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee include recommending candidates for annual election to the Board of Directors and filling vacancies on the Board of Directors that may arise from time-to-time and senior management succession. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is not limited to any specific process in identifying candidates and will consider candidates suggested by other members of the Board of Directors, as well as candidates recommended by stockholders. Such recommendations should include the name and address and other pertinent information about the candidate as is required to be included in the Company’s Proxy Statement. Recommendations should be submitted to the Secretary of the Company. In addition, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is authorized to retain search firms and other consultants to assist it in identifying candidates and fulfilling other duties.

As described in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, consideration is given to assuring that the Board of Directors, as a whole, considers diversity in its broadest sense, including persons diverse in geography, gender and ethnicity as well as representing diverse experiences, skills and backgrounds. We believe a diverse group can best perpetuate the success of the business and represent stockholder interests through the exercise of sound judgment. The Board of Directors and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee take into account many factors in recommending candidates for a director position. These factors include, but are not limited to, the ability to make independent analytical inquiries; general understanding of marketing, finance, accounting and other elements relevant to the success of a publicly-traded company in today’s business environment; understanding of the Company’s business on a technical level; other board service and educational and professional background. In addition, each candidate nominee must possess fundamental qualities of intelligence, honesty, good judgment, high ethics and standards of integrity, fairness and responsibility. The Board of Directors and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee evaluate each individual candidate by considering all appropriate factors as a whole. The Company’s approach favors active deliberation rather than using rigid formulas to assign relative weights to these factors. Following the end of each fiscal year, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee establishes the criteria for and conducts an annual assessment of the performance of the Board of Directors with respect to these factors. Consideration of other corporate governance principles or modifications of such principles may also be discussed at that time.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is also responsible for ensuring that the Company adheres to good corporate governance principles and for developing and implementing the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines that apply to all of its directors and management. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is also

charged with the task of ensuring the Company’s compliance with all NYSE listing requirements. Four meetings of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee were held in person or telephonically during 2013. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board of Directors. Copies of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee charter and the Corporate Governance Guidelines, are available on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and are available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing the leadership structure of the Board of Directors. As part of this review, the Committee evaluates (i) whether to have a Lead Independent Director, (ii) the responsibilities of the positions of Chairman of the Board of Directors and Lead Independent Director, and (iii) the qualifications for those positions, including whether the position of Chairman of the Board of Directors should be held by the CEO, an independent director, or a non-independent director other than the CEO. The Committee makes its recommendation to the full Board of Directors, which is responsible for approving the leadership structure of the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors has named Richard G. Dooley as its Lead Independent Director. In this capacity, Mr. Dooley is designated to chair executive sessions of the Company’s Non-Management Directors and to act as a liaison between management and other independent directors.

Meetings of Non-Management Directors. The Non-Management Directors meet in executive session at each in-person Board of Directors meeting, and more frequently if necessary. Non-Management Directors are all those Directors who are not employees of the Company. The Non-Management Directors consist of Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills, Hughes, Lourenso and Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas.

The executive officers of the Company serve in their respective capacities for approximately one-year terms and are subject to election by the Board of Directors, generally at the time of the annual meeting of the Board of Directors following the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

Please see Proposal 1 - Election of Directors - Information Regarding Nominees starting on page 9 for information regarding Milton Cooper and David B. Henry.

Glenn G. Cohen was appointed Chief Financial Officer of the Company in June 2010, and continues as Treasurer, a position he has held since 1997. Mr. Cohen directs the Company’s financial and capital strategy and oversees the day-to-day accounting, financial reporting and planning, tax, treasury and capital market activities. In addition, Mr. Cohen is responsible for the information technology activities of the Company. Prior to joining the Company in 1995 as Director of Accounting and Taxation, Mr. Cohen served as Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer for U.S. Balloon Manufacturing Company, Chief Financial Officer for EMCO Sales and Service,

L.P. and spent six years at the public accounting firm Coopers & Lybrand, LLP (predecessor to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP), where he served as a manager in the audit group. Mr. Cohen received a Bachelor of Science degree in accounting from the State University of New York at Albany in 1985. He is a Certified Public Accountant and a member of NAREIT and ICSC.

Conor C. Flynn was appointed Chief Operating Officer of the Company in May 2013. Mr. Flynn directs the strategic and day-to-day activities of the Company's shopping center business. Prior to his current role, Mr. Flynn was President of the Western Region of the Company responsible for directing personnel that handled leasing, property management, construction, asset management and value creation. Mr. Flynn joined the Company in June 2003 as an Asset Manager. Mr. Flynn received a B.S. degree from Yale University and a Master's degree in Real Estate Development from Columbia University. Mr. Flynn is a licensed real estate broker in California, and a member of Urban Land Institute (ULI), NAREIT and ICSC.

We pay our NEOs using salary, annual incentive and equity awards. We seek to pay our NEOs in a way that encourages long-term increases in stockholder value and long-term employee retention. We also recognize that our NEO pay must compete with what comparable employers pay. For 2013, our NEOs were:

• Milton Cooper, Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors;
   
• David B. Henry, Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer;
   
• Michael V. Pappagallo, former Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer;
   
• Glenn G. Cohen, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer; and
   
• Conor C. Flynn, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. 

Our Board of Directors has an Executive Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) that administers and monitors what and how we pay our NEOs and other executives. The Committee held five meetings in person or by phone during 2013. The Committee is comprised of Joe Grills (Chairman), Philip E. Coviello, Richard G. Dooley, F. Patrick Hughes, Frank Lourenso, Colombe M. Nicholas and Richard B. Saltzman. We encourage feedback from our stockholders regarding our executive compensation program. In 2013, over 99% of the votes cast (i.e., excluding abstentions and broker non-votes) in our Say-on-Pay advisory vote approved the proposal.

Our senior management team worked to strategically position Kimco for long-term performance by focusing their efforts on strengthening our portfolio, maintaining our capital and liquidity positions, and operating competitively. Our compensation decisions in 2013 emphasized rewarding corporate / financial performance and individual performances and achievements of our NEOs, commensurate with our business results, to successfully execute our strategy to be the premier owner and operator of neighborhood and community shopping centers through investments primarily in the U.S. and Canada.

Kimco Realty Corporation is one of the nation’s largest publicly traded owners and operators of neighborhood and community shopping centers, measured in gross leasable area (“GLA”). As of December 31, 2013, the Company had interests in 852 shopping center properties aggregating 124.5 million square feet of GLA and 575 other property interests, primarily through the

Company’s preferred equity investments and other real estate investments, totaling 13.2 million square feet of GLA, for a grand total of 1,427 properties aggregating 137.7 million square feet of GLA, located in 42 states, Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Chile and Peru.

We were able to deliver improved financial results and make progress on our business development strategies. Highlights of the 2013 fiscal year included:

• Achieved funds from operations (“FFO”), as adjusted (non-GAAP) of $543.7 million or $1.33 per diluted share for the full year 2013, representing a 5.6% increase per diluted share over 2012 FFO, as adjusted. See Annex A starting on page 52 for the definition of FFO and FFO, as adjusted and a reconciliation of 2013 net income to FFO, as adjusted.

• Gross occupancy in the total combined shopping center portfolio reached 94.6% as of December 31, 2013, representing an increase of 60 basis points from the 2012 year end level of 94.0%.
   
• Executed 2,473 leases, renewals and options totaling over 9.9 million square feet in the combined shopping center portfolio.

 
• Acquired 32 shopping center properties and eight outparcels comprising an aggregate 4.1 million square feet of GLA in 2013.

• Disposed of 36 operating properties and three outparcels.
   
• Monetized non-retail assets of $304.7 million and reduced its non-retail book values by $337.3 million to $61.2 million.
   

• Executed over $600 million of capital raising during 2013 primarily used for the refinancing and repayment of debt resulting in savings of approximately $13.5 million annually.

Our compensation philosophy and corporate governance standards are designed to align executive compensation with long-term stockholder interests:

• We maintain a majority vote for the election of directors (uncontested elections). We are requesting our stockholders approve an amendment to the Company’s Charter to eliminate supermajority voting requirements.
   
• The leadership structure of our Board of Directors consists of an Executive Chairman, a Vice Chairman (who is also our President and CEO), a Lead Independent Director, who is elected by the independent directors, and knowledgeable committee chairs with appropriate experience.
   
• The Committee’s independent compensation consultant, Pay Governance LLC (“Pay Governance”), is retained directly by the Committee and performs no other services for management.
   
• The Committee conducts continuous reviews of our compensation strategy, including a review of our compensation-related risk profile so that our compensation-related policies and programs do not create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
   
• A significant portion of our NEOs’ pay is performance based. For example, 76% of the CEO’s total compensation is linked directly to the Company’s performance and 80% of annual long-term incentive opportunities for all NEOs are delivered in performance-based equity awards in the form of performance shares. In 2013, our annual long-term incentive opportunities for our NEOs were in the form of performance shares and restricted stock and starting in 2014, NEOs will only receive performance-based equity awards in the form of performance shares and restricted stock.
   
• We have stock ownership guidelines for our NEOs and directors. As of December 31, 2013, each of the NEOs and directors who were employed with us satisfied his or her individual stock ownership level. See “Corporate Governance—Stock Ownership Guidelines” on page 13 for more information.
   

• We maintain a formal program of continuing education for directors. In 2013, directors participated in customized Company-sponsored sessions on business-related topics, corporate governance matters, SEC rule changes, and other current topics such as cyber security, including issues applicable to particular committees of the Board of Directors.
   
• Our Board of Directors has a policy prohibiting our NEOs and members of the Board of Directors from engaging in any hedging transactions with respect to equity securities of the Company held by them, which includes the purchase of any financial instrument (including prepaid variable forward contracts, equity swaps, collars and exchange funds) designed to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of such equity securities.
   
• The Company has a policy that limits the pledging of shares to 25% of the value of holdings above the stock ownership requirements for our NEOs and members of the Board of Directors effective December 31, 2014.
   
• The Company adopted a clawback policy as further described on page 14.
   
• Our NEOs receive no perquisites or other personal benefits, unless such benefits serve a necessary business purpose, such as the use of Company-provided vehicles and drivers. Additionally our NEOs receive other benefits, such as life insurance as well as other health and welfare programs that are provided to employees generally.
   
• We maintain an executive severance plan with a “double trigger” change in control arrangement that covers our NEOs and certain other members of the Company’s senior management. The executive severance plan does not provide for any gross-up payments for Parachute Payment Taxes (as defined below).
   

At our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we provided our stockholders with the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on executive compensation, and in future years such advisory vote will occur annually. Over 99% of the votes cast (i.e., excluding abstentions and broker non-votes) on this Say-on-Pay vote were voted in favor of the proposal. We have considered the results of the 2013 vote and believe the support of our stockholders for the vote proposal indicates that our stockholders are supportive of our approach to

executive compensation, including the ratio of performance-based compensation to all other compensation, the ratio of performance-based equity compensation to time-based equity compensation, and the integrity of our peer group. Thus we did not make changes to our executive compensation arrangements in response to the vote. In the future, we will continue to consider the outcome of our Say-on-Pay votes when making compensation decisions regarding our NEOs.

Our executive compensation program provides pay-for-performance compensation that is aligned with the interests of our stockholders and is designed to continue to attract, retain and appropriately motivate our key employees who drive long-term value creation. The following graph shows the correlation between our net income, FFO, as adjusted, EBITDA, as adjusted, and FFO per share, as adjusted, and the total compensation we paid to our CEO during the last five fiscal years, based on the amounts reported in the summary compensation tables of our Proxy Statements for these years.

FFO, as adjusted, EBITDA, as adjusted, and leverage, calculated from debt to total assets, defined as consolidated debt plus JV pro rata share of debt divided by the total gross consolidatd assets and JV share of pro rata gross assets, are the metrics used in our annual incentive program, ensuring that pay and performance, as measured in our executive compensation program, are aligned. See Annex A starting on page 52 for a reconciliation of net income to FFO, as adjusted and EBITDA, as adjusted.

Base Salary

In determining our NEOs’ base salaries, the Committee considered each NEO’s scope of responsibilities, individual qualifications and experience, future potential, past performance and the practices of our peer group, without applying a quantitative formula. We did not seek a specific target within our peer group. Base salary increases, if any, are effective January 1 and are based upon the performance of each NEO as assessed and approved by the Board of Directors and Committee. No formulaic base salary increases are provided to the NEOs, and other forms of compensation are generally used to reward overall Company performance or exceptional performance of a particular NEO. Messrs. Cohen and Flynn received base salary increases for 2013 based on, among other factors, their quantitative and qualitative performance factors as discussed starting on page 28 and in the case of Mr. Flynn, based on his appointment as Chief Operating Officer in May 2013. Messrs. Cooper, Henry and Pappagallo received base salaries for 2013 that reflected no increase from their 2012 base salaries.

• Mr. Cooper received a base salary of $750,000 in 2013.
   
• Mr. Henry received a base salary of $800,000 in 2013.
   
• Mr. Pappagallo received a base salary of $750,000 in 2013.*
   
• Mr. Cohen received a base salary of $625,000 in 2013.
   
• Mr. Flynn received a base salary of $575,000 in 2013.* 
  

Annual Incentive Plan

Under our executive compensation program, each NEO is eligible to receive an annual cash bonus based on the Company’s corporate / financial performance compared to targets and such NEO’s individual performance against specific quantitative and qualitative goals as further discussed starting on page 28. For each NEO’s annual bonus opportunity for 2013, 60% was based on the Company’s corporate / financial performance for the performance year compared to targets as measured by the Company’s (1) FFO, as adjusted for the performance year compared to Target FFO, (2) retail EBITDA, as adjusted compared to Target EBITDA and (3) leverage compared to Target Leverage, and 40% was based on individual NEO performance against specific quantitative and qualitative goals as discussed starting on page 28 and as evaluated by the Committee. The following table shows the percent of the Total Annual Target Bonus each NEO would receive based on achievement of threshold, target and maximum levels for corporate / financial performance and individual performance.

The table below shows the target bonus and the bonus actually earned in 2013 for each NEO. Mr. Pappagallo was not eligible to receive a bonus for 2013 because he did not remain employed by us for the entire year. In establishing the target bonuses, we considered the responsibilities of each NEO, Mr. Henry’s recommendations, and the peer group practices discussed in “Comparison to Competitive Market.” The Committee awarded 2013 bonuses based on the following analysis of our corporate / financial performance and each NEO’s individual performance:

• Corporate / Financial Performance. In 2013, the Company’s Target FFO was $1.31 on a diluted per share basis, Target EBITDA was $945 million and Target Leverage was 45%. After the Committee considered the Company’s actual 2013 FFO, as adjusted, retail EBITDA, as adjusted and leverage, the Committee’s payout for the corporate financial incentive was based on an achievement of 101.5%, 100.2% and 100.9% of Target FFO, Target EBITDA and Target Leverage, respectively which resulted in a payout for the corporate financial incentive of 63.45% of each NEO’s 2013 total target bonus.*
   
• Individual Performance. The Committee’s evaluation of each NEO’s individual performance against, among other factors, specific quantitative and qualitative goals is detailed below in “Analysis of Each NEO’s Compensation” as further discussed starting on page 28. In general, in determining each NEO’s target level, the Committee considered each 

NEO’s scope of responsibilities, individual qualifications and experience, performance in 2013 and the practices of our peer group, without applying a quantitative formula. In 2013, the Committee also considered the NEOs’ efforts to successfully refocus the Company on its core assets and business amidst continuing economic challenges and uncertainties. The Committee agreed to award each NEO individual performance bonuses of approximately 40% to 60% of each NEO’s 2013 total target bonus.

• Calculation of Total 2013 Bonus. The bonuses actually received by each NEO are determined by adding the corporate / financial performance bonus and the individual performance bonus together. Thus, each NEO earned a total 2013 bonus of approximately 104% to 123% of the 2013 total target bonus.

2013 NEO Bonuses

Long-Term Incentive Plan

The Company maintains a long-term incentive plan pursuant to which the Company makes annual equity-based compensation awards to the NEOs. The target number of shares underlying the long-term incentive equity awards were established in February 2013 for the calendar year 2013. In establishing the equity awards, we considered the qualitative factors discussed in “Analysis of Each NEO’s Compensation,” Mr. Henry’s recommendations, and peer group practices discussed in “Comparison to Competitive Market.” We also used our business judgment to determine appropriate equity compensation to recognize the potential of our executive officers for our business and retain our executive officers for the long term.

Approximately 20% of the value of the equity awards are awarded in the form of time-vesting stock options (or, upon election of the NEO, time-vesting restricted stock). Mr. Flynn was awarded 5,400 options and 5,400 shares of restricted stock at the time he was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. For 2013, the time-vesting awards were granted under the Company’s 2010 Equity Participation Plan, as such plan may be amended from time to time (the “2010 Equity Participation Plan”). The actual time-vesting awards granted are set out in the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards for 2013” table below.

Approximately 80% of the value of the equity awards were awarded in the form of performance shares. The performance share awards were granted under the 2010 Equity Participation Plan. Each performance share award provides for the grant of restricted stock in the year following the year in which the performance shares are awarded based on the Company’s total stockholder return in the performance year compared to the retail index peers (and if the Company’s total stockholder return for the performance year is less than the minimum target level, no restricted stock is granted with respect to such performance shares) according to the following schedule:

Restricted Stock Awards Granted with Respect to Earned Performance Shares Based on Company’s Total Stockholder Return

If the Company’s relative total stockholder return in a performance year results in restricted stock being awarded with respect to such year, the restricted stock awards are subject to transfer restrictions and forfeiture conditions until such awards become vested.

New Long-Term Incentive 3-Year Performance Period

In early 2013, the Committee reviewed changing the performance period used to measure the Company’s performance as related to long-term incentive awards from the current one-year period to a three-year period to better align the long-term incentive awards with competitive practices and stockholder interests and support the Committee’s objectives of long-term value creation. In late 2013, the Committee decided to move toward a three-year performance period, including a transition period for performance shares granted based on 2014 and 2015 performance, with performance shares granted in 2016 to be subject to the full three-year performance period.

The following table shows the target performance share awards and the number of performance shares actually earned for 2013.

2013 Performance Share Awards

Companies listed in the NAREIT Retail Index on January 1st of each calendar year (excluding the Company) are the peer group used to determine relative total stockholder return and the number of shares of restricted stock payable with respect to performance shares in each respective year. For 2013, these companies were:

     Acadia Realty Trust
     Agree Realty Corp.
     Alexander’s Inc.
     CBL & Associates Properties Inc.
     Cedar Shopping Centers Inc.
     DDR Corp.
     Equity One Inc.
     Excel Trust
     Federal Realty Investment Trust
     General Growth Properties, Inc.
     Getty Realty Corp.
     Glimcher Realty Trust
     Inland Real Estate Corp.
     Kite Realty Group Trust
     The Macerich Company
     National Retail Properties Inc.
     Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust
     Ramco-Gershenson Properties Trust
     Realty Income Corporation
     Regency Centers Corp.
     Retail Opportunity Investment Corp.
     Retail Properties of America, Inc.
     Rouse Properties, Inc.
     Saul Centers Inc.
     Simon Property Group Inc.
     Spirit Realty Capital, Inc.
     Tanger Factory Outlet Centers Inc.
     Taubman Centers Inc.
     Urstadt Biddle Properties Inc.
     Weingarten Realty Investors

The Committee considers each of the NEO’s quantitative and qualitative performance factors as a whole in determining each NEO’s salary and the individual performance component of each NEO’s annual bonus. Individual members of the Committee may give different weights to different factors. We also consider our CEO’s evaluation of our individual executives’ performance and his recommended set of compensation actions for all NEOs. The Committee uses its business judgment to determine appropriate compensation in order to recognize the contributions and potential of our executives.

Milton Cooper

Mr. Cooper serves as the Company’s Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors and in 2013, earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Cooper, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

• Promoted sustained excellence through communication, culture, organization and integration and demonstrated and promoted key company values of integrity, creativity and stability.
   
• Developed and directed an effective overall strategy to upgrade the Company’s portfolio by aggressively selling 36 lower-quality properties and adding 32 high-quality assets, while maintaining a balanced and diversified portfolio.
   
• Developed disposition lists and helped formulate long-term target markets.

• Continued to reduce investments in non-retail and non-strategic centers. Non-retail assets were reduced to less than 0.5% of total assets.
   
• Partnered with Mr. Henry in closing dispositions from the Company’s Latin America portfolio totaling in excess of $1.1 billion.
   
• Supported continued efforts to build an independent underwriting, closing and due diligence team.
   
• Sourced a $33 million acquisition opportunity in Elmsford, NY by working with the bankruptcy estate of a retailer.
   
• Invested extensive time mentoring the newly appointed Chief Operating Officer as well as several other members of the executive management team, and motivated them to preserve and create short-term and long-term stockholder value.
   
• Strengthened relationships with large retailers and important tenants by working with the Chief Operating Officer and Regional Presidents to build relationships through ICSC meetings, conferences and portfolio reviews.
   
• Represented the Company externally, including with tenants, operators and managers, the investor community, industry organizations and the media, to enhance the Company’s reputation and communicate its strengths and competitive advantages.

David B. Henry

Mr. Henry serves as the Company’s President, CEO and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and in 2013, earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Henry, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

• Oversaw implementation of corporate strategy for U.S. shopping center operations with emphasis on growing core markets and exiting non-core markets, shifting towards larger size assets and more urban oriented properties, and increasing asset and property management initiatives and resources and communicated such strategy to the market via an Investor Day in December 2013, investor roadshows, analyst earnings calls, NAREIT meetings, the Kimco blog and social media platforms and other marketing materials.
   
• Increased FFO per share, as adjusted from $1.26 in 2012 to $1.33 for 2013 and achieved combined pro rata portfolio occupancy of 94.5% and same site NOI growth of 3.5% (3.8% excluding currency effects).
   
• Achieved new business acquisition volume of $876 million including purchase of joint venture partner interests.
   
• Led monetization efforts in Latin America reducing exposure by $365 million and led the continued disposition of non-strategic retail assets by selling 35 properties in 2013 and closing the sale of the InTown portfolio to Starwood Capital.
   
• Continued to reduce preferred equity retail portfolio by acquiring partner interests, property sales, or refinancing, reducing the total from $84.2 million at December 31, 2012 to $71.3 million at December 31, 2013.
   
• Generated preferred equity profits in excess of $22 million.
   
• Achieved corporate leverage levels of 5.5x Net Debt to EBITDA as adjusted and fixed charge coverage of 2.9x at year end 2013 primarily from increased property level performance attributable to higher occupancy and increased leasing spreads.
   
• Continued to maintain effective relationships with rating agencies, analysts, major stockholders, large retailers, industry trade groups and institutional joint venture partners and maintained the Company’s BBB+/BBB+/Baa1 unsecured debt ratings.
   

• Supported the Chief Financial Officer in efforts to capitalize on historically low interest rates by issuing U.S. and Canadian long term debentures and preferred stock and refinancing 26 mortgages totaling over $832 million.
   
• Actively participated in NAREIT, and elected Vice-Chairman of NAREIT for 2014. Actively involved in ICSC and named a member of the Executive Committee and Nominating and Governance Committee. Participated in ICSC efforts on Main Street Fairness legislation. Actively involved as a member of the Real Estate Roundtable and the Real Estate Advisory Committees of local universities.

Michael V. Pappagallo

Mr. Pappagallo served as the Company’s Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer until his resignation effective May 20, 2013, and in 2013, earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

Glenn G. Cohen

Mr. Cohen serves as the Company’s Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and in 2013, earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Cohen, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

• Successfully completed the issuance of (i) a new $350 million ten-year unsecured bond at a coupon rate of 3.125%, (ii) a new CAD$200 million seven-year unsecured bond at a coupon rate of 3.855% and (iii) renewed the Company’s 1 billion Mexican peso denominated ($77 million U.S. equivalent) facility for an additional five-year term on a floating rate basis, with the flexibility to repay at any time without penalty. These collective financings will provide savings of approximately $13.5 million annually.
   
• Sourced over $830 million of new mortgage financing in 26 separate transactions for both the refinancing of maturing debt and new capital for the joint venture with Blackstone. The mortgage financing activity provided coupon savings of approximately 200 basis points per transaction. In addition, the company sourced these loans directly, without the use of an outside broker, saving the joint ventures and the Company an estimated $2.5 million in fees.
   
• Maintained immediate liquidity of more than $1 billion at all times throughout 2013 via access to our $1.75 billion revolving credit facility and cash on hand. Our liquidity position at December 31, 2013 was over $1.5 billion.

Glenn G. Cohen Objectives continued

• Maintained Net Debt/EBITDA as adjusted in a range of 5.5x - 6.0x, a level viewed as vital to maintain our BBB+/BBB+/Baa1 unsecured debt ratings, ending the year at 5.5x.
   
• Improved Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio as calculated by S&P to 2.8x, and by Moody’s to 2.7x. Our internal calculation has improved to 2.9x.
   
• Continued to strengthen and broaden the Company’s commercial and investment banking and rating agency relationships, while maintaining ratings of BBB+/BBB+/Baa1.
   
• Sourced over $1.5 billion of new capital from our commercial banking and investment banking relationships utilizing over 25 different firms.
   
• Further enhanced relationships with the research analysts and major stockholders and fixed income investors through active participation in non-deal roadshows and trade group conferences including NAREIT and ICSC. Continued development as a key Company spokesperson participating on various panels related to the real estate industry.
   
• In concert with the senior management team, executed on key areas of corporate strategy including achieving FFO per share, as adjusted, of $1.33 (an increase of 5.6% over 2012 per share level of $1.26); achieving same site NOI growth of 3.5% (3.8% excluding currency effects); increasing gross occupancy in the total combined shopping center portfolio 60 basis points to 94.6%; selling 35 non-strategic U.S. retail properties for a gross price of $350 million as well as selling assets in Mexico, Brazil, Chile and Peru for net proceeds of approximately $380 million; and reducing non-retail investments by over $320 million, bringing the remaining non-retail balance to less than $60 million.
   
• Redeployed proceeds from sales to acquire 27 shopping centers in key target markets totaling $653 million gross acquisition volume.
   
• Managed the company’s liquidity and strengthened the balance sheet through his leadership role on financing transactions.
   
• Actively participated in numerous industry and trade group conferences (Citi CEO Conference, Wells Fargo RIE conference, Barclay’s RIE conference, UBS RIE conference, ICSC and NAREIT) as well as non-deal road shows in the U.S. and Europe.

• Continued to mentor and develop key managers fostering a culture of teamwork, cooperation and enthusiasm.
   
• Concluded an in-depth review of legal entities for potential tax restructuring benefits, reducing tax compliance costs and eliminating inefficient structures.

Conor C. Flynn

Mr. Flynn serves as the Company’s Chief Operating Officer and in 2013, earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Flynn, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

• Achieved overall improvement in U.S. occupancy, leasing spreads, and same site NOI. Overall U.S. occupancy increased by 100 basis points from 93.9% to 94.9%. Leasing spreads were positive for all four quarters of 2013, and U.S. same site NOI increased by 3.8%.
   
• Achieved ancillary income (including cell towers, trash and solar) revenues of $16.0 million, an increase of 3.1% over 2012.
   
• Resolved ten of the top 25 vacancies in the strategic portfolio by leasing five vacant anchor boxes and selling five other anchor deals with another four deals in the anchor pipeline.
   
• Developed a $778 million redevelopment, value-creation pipeline totaling 262 projects through asset tours and recurring regional reviews.
   
• Actively engaged in the disposition of 35 U.S. non-strategic properties for a gross price of $350 million.
   
• Captured value-enhancing real estate opportunities through the acquisition of a Publix anchored shopping center in Pensacola, FL; agreed to terms to acquire fee under our ground lease position in Chicago; finalized terms to acquire an Albertsons box shopping center in Mount Dora, FL which will be a redevelopment site; extended a Jewel lease in a Bloomington, IL shopping center that is part of a joint venture that enables Kimco to market the center for sale.
   
• Reduced exposure to challenged retailers and operating formats negatively impacted by e-commerce including electronics, books and office supplies.
   
• Strengthened retailer relationships by hosting and visiting major retailers to source new deals, review existing portfolio and collaborate to reduce restrictions, exclusives and co-tenancy clauses.

Conor C. Flynn Objectives continued

• Partnered with senior management in furthering information technology initiatives including piloting a mobile commerce initiative at select Kimco centers which focuses on wireless Internet deployment, shopper analytics and loyalty programs with participating tenants, as well as launching an iPad site inspection application to enhance productivity and efficiency.
   
• Expanded new revenue sources, including electric-vehicle charging stations, cellular towers, and a potential expansion of the solar program. Solar income for 2013 grew to $2.0 million, the highest level since the launch of this program in early 2010.
   
• Developed the “Clicks to Bricks” program, promoting and incentivizing select online retailers to open brick and mortar stores as a complement to their online presence.

• Worked with management in furthering the Company’s strategic direction by simplifying the business, reducing joint ventures, exiting low growth or at-risk assets and placing a deeper focus on redeveloping high potential assets.
   
• Continued efforts to develop and enhance the workforce by strengthening the culture of teamwork across all disciplines and businesses; strengthening communications and sharing best practices across regions in all operational areas such as construction, property management, leasing, and redevelopment; and identifying high potential employees and creating mentoring relationships.
   
• Continued to build relationships with the investment community, peers and colleagues in the REIT industry through executive round tables and by attending numerous industry events (NAREIT and ICSC), non-deal road shows and investor property tours.

We review competitive compensation data from a select group of peer companies and broader survey sources. However, we do not set our NEO pay as a direct function of market pay levels. Instead, we use market data to help confirm that our pay practices are reasonable. Using this data and NAREIT comparison data supplied by the Company, Pay Governance conducted survey data analysis and provided comment and analysis regarding our peer group. At the Committee’s request, Pay Governance prepared an annual report summarizing the Company’s peer group, market data and peer group methodology as well as Pay Governance’s findings and recommendations. This report was discussed with the Committee in early 2013. As a primary reference, Pay Governance gathered proxy pay data for the following REITs with market capitalizations comparable to ours and with whom we compete for executive talent.

     AvalonBay Communities Inc.
     Boston Properties Inc.
     Brookfield Properties Corp.
     DDR Corp.
     Duke Realty Corp.
     Equity One
     Equity Residential
     Federal Realty Investment Trust
     General Growth Properties, Inc.

     Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
     The Macerich Company
     Marriott International Inc.
     Prologis
     Public Storage
     Regency Centers Corp.
     Simon Property Group Inc.
     SL Green Realty Corp.
     Starwood Hotel & Resorts Worldwide Inc.
     Ventas Inc.
     Weingarten Realty Investors

The Committee considered the Pay Governance information as an input in its decision making process for determining our NEOs’ compensation. Pay Governance reported directly to the Committee and provided no other services besides executive compensation services to the Company.

The Committee considered whether Pay Governance’s work providing information that the Committee uses when determining compensation for the Company’s NEOs and other executive officers raises any conflicts of interest and determined that no conflicts of interest exist.

Long-Term Incentives — Equity Awards. The exercise price of stock options granted to our NEOs is 100% of the market closing price of our stock on the date of the grant. As a general principle, we do not time grants in connection with the release of material non-public information.

Our NEOs are eligible to retire at the earlier of age 65 or 20 years of service to the Company and their equity awards (excluding retention or performance awards) would vest immediately upon retirement. Messrs. Cooper and Henry are currently eligible to retire from the Company. We do not maintain special pension plans for our NEOs because we believe this accelerated vesting offsets the lack of such plans. The Committee may accelerate equity vesting at its discretion.

We generally allow our employees (including our NEOs) who are eligible to receive over 7,500 stock options in a particular year to elect, in advance of the grant date, to receive up to 100% of the value of their equity award in the form of restricted stock. We allow these employees to elect to receive stock options or restricted stock in deference to each employee’s personal preferences and circumstances. We calculate the amount of restricted stock to be received based on a ratio of the then approximate fair value of the options over the Common Stock trading price. Beginning August 6, 2008, restricted stock awards which were received through an election to receive restricted stock instead of a stock option grant vest ratably over four years. If an employee receiving restricted stock is terminated prior to vesting for reasons other than death, disability, retirement, without cause or change of control, the employee would not receive the unvested underlying stock. Prior to vesting, recipients of this restricted stock may vote the shares and also receive dividends.

Executive Severance Plan – “Double-Trigger” Change in Control Severance Arrangement. On March 15, 2010, the Executive Compensation Committee adopted the Kimco Realty Corporation Executive Severance Plan, as amended from time to time (the “Severance Plan”) pursuant to which our NEOs and certain other members of the Company’s senior management, are eligible for severance payments if the covered executive’s employment is terminated by the Company without “Cause” or, following a change in control, by the executive for “Good Reason” (each as defined in the Severance Plan), subject to the terms and conditions described in the Severance Plan. Upon a covered termination of employment, a participant will receive two times the sum of (a) the participant’s annual base salary and (b) the amount of the participant’s annual bonus received in the prior year, payable in equal installments over the two years following the termination or in a lump sum if the termination occurs within two years following a change in control. The participant will also receive eighteen months of continued participation in the Company’s health insurance

plans or successor plans (running concurrently with the COBRA period) and accelerated vesting of all unvested stock options and restricted stock awards, but not performance share awards. In certain circumstances, if a participant would otherwise have incurred excise taxes under Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code (“Parachute Payment Taxes”), his or her payments will be reduced to the “safe harbor amount,” such that no such excise taxes would be due. The Severance Plan does not provide for any gross-up payments for Parachute Payment Taxes incurred by any participant.

Mr. Henry agreed, effective as of March 14, 2013, that the bonus component of his severance pursuant to the Executive Severance Plan shall be based on the average actual bonus he received in the three years immediately prior to the year in which the termination occurs. Mr. Cooper requested and the Company has agreed to cease his participation in the Company’s Severance Plan effective March 14, 2013.

Retirement Plans. We maintain a 401(k) retirement plan (the “401(k) Plan”) in which substantially all of employees, including our NEOs, are eligible to participate. The 401(k) Plan permits participants to defer up to a maximum of 100% of their eligible base salary compensation, up to the federal limit. The Company currently makes matching contributions on a dollar-for-dollar basis to all employees contributing to their 401(k) accounts and who have completed one year of employment with the Company, of up to 5% of the employee’s base salary compensation (and subject to a maximum of $8,500 for highly compensated employees). Participants in the 401(k) Plan are not subject to federal and state income tax on salary deferral contributions or Company contributions or on the earnings thereon until such amounts are withdrawn from the 401(k) Plan. Salary reduction contributions are treated as wages subject to FICA and Medicare tax. Withdrawals from the 401(k) Plan may only be made upon termination of employment, or in connection with certain provisions of the 401(k) Plan that permit hardship withdrawals, allow in-service distributions and loans, or require minimum distribution. The 401(k) Plan also includes a Roth 401(k) feature which enables participants to defer some or all of their 401(k) contributions on an after-tax rather than pre-tax basis, allowing for tax-free (federal and most state) distributions on both participant contributions and related earnings at retirement. Generally, participation in the Roth 401(k) allows for tax free distributions if the Roth account has been in place for 5 years and the participant has attained age 59 ½. We do not maintain any other retirement plans for our NEOs or employees. The Company does not provide any pension benefits or any non-qualified deferred compensation to its NEOs or employees.

Tax and Accounting Considerations. The recognition or deferral of period expense in our financial statements did not factor into the allocation of compensation among base salary, bonus and equity awards. Cash salary and bonus are charged as an expense in the period in which the amounts are earned by the NEO. The value of equity awards are amortized ratably into expense over the vesting period, except for the value of equity awards granted to our NEOs eligible for retirement, which were expensed immediately in the periodic financial statements as of the grant date in accordance with FASB ASC 718, which requires immediately expensing of equity awards of employees eligible for retirement.

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code generally places a $1 million annual limit on the amount of compensation paid to each of the Company’s NEOs who were officers on the last day of the relevant taxable year other than its Chief Financial Officer that may be deducted by the Company for federal income tax purposes unless such compensation constitutes “qualified performance-based compensation” which is based on the achievement of pre-established performance goals set by a committee of the Board of Directors pursuant to an incentive plan that has been approved by the Company’s stockholders. The 2010 Equity Participation Plan provides that certain awards made thereunder may, in the discretion of the plan administrator, be structured in a manner intended to qualify for the “qualified performance-based compensation” exception to the $1 million annual deductibility limit of Section 162(m).

Other provisions of the Internal Revenue Code can also affect compensation decisions. Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, which governs the form and timing of payment of deferred compensation, imposes sanctions, including a 20% penalty and an interest penalty, on the recipient of deferred compensation that does not comply with Section 409A. The Committee takes into account the implications of Section 409A in determining the form and timing of compensation awarded to our executives and strives to structure any nonqualified deferred compensation plans or arrangements to be exempt from or to comply with the requirements of Section 409A.

Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code disallows a company’s tax deduction for payments received by certain individuals in connection with a change in control to the extent that the payments exceed an amount approximately three times their average annual compensation, and Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a 20% excise tax on those payments. The Committee takes into account the implications of Section 280G in determining potential payments to be made to our executives in connection with a change in control. Nevertheless, to the extent that certain payments upon a change in control are classified as excess parachute payments, such payments may not be deductible pursuant to Section 280G.

Perquisites. We do not treat our NEOs materially differently from our other senior employees with respect to perquisites. We provided the following perquisites to our NEOs in 2013:

• We provided Messrs. Cooper, Henry and Pappagallo with the use of a car and driver to travel for Company business. Other employees may use these cars for Company business when these cars are not in use by the above mentioned NEOs. Messrs. Cohen and Flynn received a car allowance in the amount of $10,920 for the year 2013 and $5,880 from May 2013 to December 2013, respectively. Beginning December 2013, the Company provided Mr. Flynn with the use of a car to conduct his duties as an executive officer of the Company. Each such NEO may use the car without a driver for personal use.
   
• We provide certain of our officers and senior executives (including all NEOs) a limited long-term care benefit of $3,500 per month as part of a group policy. These individuals may elect to purchase additional long-term care insurance at their own cost.
   
• Our NEOs are entitled to participate in our other health and welfare plans on the same terms as other employees.

The Executive Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of Kimco Realty Corporation (the “Company”) has reviewed and discussed with the Company’s management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis that is required by Securities and Exchange Commission Rules to be included in this Proxy Statement.

Based on that review and those discussions, the Committee has recommended to the Company’s Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

The foregoing report shall not be deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference this Proxy Statement into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (the “Securities Act”) or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”) except that the Company specifically incorporates this information by reference, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.