Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.          )

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

353 North Clark Street

Suite 3300

Chicago, Illinois 60654

(877) 483-6827

April 4, 2017

Dear Ventas Stockholder:

Please join me and the Board of Directors at our 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be held on Thursday, May 18, 2017, at our headquarters in Chicago, Illinois. The business we will conduct at the meeting is described in the attached Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement.

We worked hard in 2016 to continue our commitment to stakeholders and once again delivered superior performance through our total stockholder return and strong FFO and dividend growth, the continued expansion and success of our business, and the strength and character of our team. The Ventas Advantage – superior properties, platforms and people – continues to drive our outperformance and secure our position as the premier capital provider to best-in-class operators and developers. We welcome the opportunity to present you with the information contained in this Proxy Statement and we hope that, after you review it, you will vote at the meeting (either in person or by proxy) in accordance with our Board of Directors’ recommendations. Your vote is important to us and our business.

If you are voting by proxy, please submit your proxy as soon as possible to ensure your vote is recorded at the Annual Meeting. You may vote by telephone, over the Internet or – if you have requested paper copies of our proxy materials by mail – by signing, dating and returning the proxy card in the envelope provided.

Our Board of Directors greatly appreciates your investment and continued support.

Sincerely,

Debra A. Cafaro

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

Table of Contents

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

Thursday, May 18, 2017

8:00 a.m., Local (Central) Time

James C. Tyree Auditorium, 353 North Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60654

We are pleased to invite you to join our Board of Directors and senior management for Ventas, Inc.’s 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. The Annual Meeting will be held at 8:00 a.m. local (Central) time on Thursday, May 18, 2017, in the James C. Tyree Auditorium, located at 353 North Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60654. The purposes of the meeting are:

The Proxy Statement following this Notice describes these matters in detail. We have not received notice of any other proposals to be presented at the Annual Meeting.

Our Board of Directors established March 22, 2017 as the record date for the Annual Meeting. Accordingly, holders of record of shares of our common stock as of the close of business on that date are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting and any postponements or adjournments of the meeting. We will make available to our stockholders, for ten days prior to the Annual Meeting, a list of stockholders entitled to vote. That list will be available for inspection during normal business hours at our principal executive offices located at 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654, and it will also be available at the Annual Meeting.

Please vote your shares promptly by telephone, over the Internet or – if you have requested paper copies of our proxy materials by mail – by signing, dating and returning the proxy card in the envelope provided. Voting your shares prior to the Annual Meeting will not prevent you from changing your vote in person if you choose to attend the meeting.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

T. Richard Riney

Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer,

General Counsel and Ethics and Compliance Officer

April 4, 2017

Chicago, Illinois

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION

Quorum

The holders of a majority of the shares of our common stock outstanding as of the close of business on the record date for the Annual Meeting, March 22, 2017, must be present in person or represented by proxy to constitute a quorum to transact business at the Annual Meeting. Stockholders who abstain from voting and broker non-votes are counted for purposes of establishing a quorum. A broker non-vote occurs when a beneficial owner does not provide voting instructions to the beneficial owner’s broker or custodian with respect to a proposal on which the broker or custodian does not have discretionary authority to vote.

Who Can Vote

Only Ventas stockholders of record at the close of business on the record date are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. As of that date, 354,853,000 shares of our common stock, par value $0.25 per share, were outstanding. Each share of our common stock entitles the owner to one vote on each matter properly brought before the Annual Meeting. However, certain shares designated as “Excess Shares” (generally any shares owned by a beneficial owner in excess of 9.0% of our outstanding common stock) or as “Special Excess Shares” pursuant to our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended (our “Charter”), may not be voted by the record owner of those shares and will be voted in accordance with Article IX of our Charter.

A list of all stockholders entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting will be available for inspection by any stockholder for any purpose reasonably related to the meeting at the Annual Meeting and during ordinary business hours for the ten days preceding the meeting at our principal executive offices located at 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654.

How to Vote

You may vote your shares in one of several ways, depending on how you own your shares:

Stockholders of Record

If you own shares registered in your name (a “stockholder of record”), you may:

Beneficial Owners

If you own shares registered in the name of a broker, bank or other custodian (a “beneficial owner”), follow the instructions provided by your broker, bank or custodian to instruct it how to vote your shares. If you want to vote your

Table of Contents

shares in person at the Annual Meeting, contact your broker, bank or custodian to obtain a legal proxy or broker’s proxy card that you should bring to the Annual Meeting to demonstrate your authority to vote.

If you do not instruct your broker, bank or custodian how to vote, it will have discretionary authority, under current New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules, to vote your shares in its discretion on the ratification of the selection of KPMG LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2017 (Proposal 2). However, your broker, bank or custodian will not have discretionary authority to vote on the election of directors (Proposal 1), the advisory vote to approve our executive compensation (Proposal 3) or the advisory vote to specify the frequency of advisory votes to approve our executive compensation (Proposal 4) without instructions from you. As a result, if you do not provide instructions to your broker, bank or custodian, your shares will not be voted on Proposal 1, Proposal 3 or Proposal 4.

Votes by Proxy

All shares that have been properly voted by proxy and not revoked will be voted at the Annual Meeting in accordance with the instructions contained in the proxy. Shares represented by proxy cards that are signed and returned, but do not contain any voting instructions will be voted consistent with the Board’s recommendations:

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Our Board provides guidance and oversight with respect to our financial and operating performance, strategic plans, key corporate policies and decisions and enterprise risk management. Among other matters, our Board considers and approves significant acquisitions, dispositions and other transactions and advises and counsels senior management on key financial and business objectives. Members of the Board monitor our progress with respect to these matters on a regular basis, including through presentations made at Board and committee meetings by our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Investment Officer and other members of senior management.

Criteria for Board Membership

Our Guidelines on Governance set forth the process by which our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee (the “Nominating Committee”) identifies and evaluates nominees for Board membership. In accordance with this process, the Nominating Committee annually considers and recommends to the Board a slate of directors for election at the next annual meeting of stockholders. In selecting this slate, the Nominating Committee considers the following: incumbent directors who have indicated a willingness to continue to serve on our Board; candidates, if any, nominated by our stockholders; and other potential candidates identified by the Nominating Committee. Additionally, if at any time during the year a seat on the Board becomes vacant or a new seat is created, the Nominating Committee considers and recommends to the Board a candidate for appointment to fill the vacant or newly-created seat.

The Nominating Committee considers different perspectives, skill sets, education, ages, genders, ethnic origins and business experience in its annual nomination process. In general, the Nominating Committee seeks to include on our Board a complementary mix of individuals with diverse backgrounds, knowledge and viewpoints reflecting the broad set of challenges that the Board confronts without representing any particular interest group or constituency. The Nominating Committee regularly reviews the size and composition of the Board on a holistic basis, utilizing a rigorous matrix of identified skills, experiences and other criteria for maintaining an excellent, independent Board in light of our changing requirements and seeks nominees who, taken together as a group, possess the skills, diversity and expertise appropriate for an effective Board.

Table of Contents

The Nominating Committee also monitors the average tenure of our Board members and seeks to achieve a variety of director tenures in order to benefit from long-tenured directors’ institutional knowledge and newly-elected directors’ fresh perspectives. During 2015 and 2016, the Nominating Committee and the Board has taken the opportunity to refresh the composition of the Board, with our two longest-tenured directors departing from the Board and being replaced by Roxanne M. Martino and Walter C. Rakowich in 2016.

The Nominating Committee seeks to recommend candidates that have adequate time to devote to Board activities, recognizing that public company board of directors responsibilities command a significant portion of directors’ time. Accordingly, the Company maintains an overboarding policy that prohibits directors from simultaneously serving on more than four public company boards other than the Company’s Board.

In evaluating potential director candidates, the Nominating Committee considers, among other factors, the experience, qualifications and attributes listed below and any additional characteristics that it believes one or more directors should possess, based on an assessment of the needs of our Board at that time. Our Guidelines on Governance provide that, in general, nominees for membership on the Board should:

In addition, our directors are expected to be active participants in governing our enterprise, and our Nominating Committee looks for certain characteristics common to all Board members, including integrity, independence, leadership ability, constructive and collegial personal attributes, candor and the ability and willingness to evaluate, challenge and stimulate.

No single factor or group of factors is necessarily dispositive of whether a candidate will be recommended by our Nominating Committee. The Nominating Committee considers and applies these same standards in evaluating individuals recommended for nomination to our Board by our stockholders in accordance with the procedures described in this Proxy Statement under “Requirements for Submission of Stockholder Proposals, Director Nominations and Other Business.” Our Board’s satisfaction of these criteria is implemented and assessed through ongoing consideration of directors and nominees by the Nominating Committee and the Board, as well as the Board’s annual self-evaluation process. Based upon these activities, our Nominating Committee and our Board believe that the director-nominees named in this Proxy Statement satisfy these criteria.

We have from time to time retained search firms and other third parties to assist us in identifying potential candidates based on specific criteria that we provided to them, including the qualifications described above. We may retain search firms and other third parties on similar or other terms in the future.

Director Independence

Our Guidelines on Governance require that at least a majority of the members of our Board meet the criteria for independence under the rules and regulations of the NYSE. For a director to be considered independent under the NYSE’s listing standards, the director must satisfy certain bright-line tests, and the Board must affirmatively determine that the director has no direct or indirect material relationship with us. Not less than annually, our Board evaluates the independence of each non-management director on a case-by-case basis by considering any matters that could affect his or her ability to exercise independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director, including all transactions and relationships between that director, members of his or her family and organizations with which that director or family members have an affiliation, on the one hand, and us, our subsidiaries and our management, on the other hand. Any such matters are evaluated from the standpoint of both the director and the persons or organizations with which the director has an affiliation. Each director abstains from participating in the determination of his or her independence.

Based on its most recent review, the Board has affirmatively determined that each of our non-employee directors

Table of Contents

has no direct or indirect material relationship with us and qualify as independent under the NYSE’s listing standards. Ms. Cafaro is not considered independent under the NYSE listing standards due to her employment as our Chief Executive Officer.

Leadership Structure and Independent Presiding Director

Our Board recognizes that one of its key responsibilities is to evaluate and determine its optimal leadership structure so as to provide effective oversight of management and a fully engaged, high-functioning Board. The Board understands that no single approach to Board leadership is universally accepted and that the appropriate leadership structure may vary based on a company’s size, industry, operations, history and culture. Consistent with this understanding, our Board, led by our Nominating Committee, annually assesses its leadership structure in light of our operating and governance environment at the time to achieve the optimal model for us and for our stockholders. Following its most recent review, the Board has determined that our existing leadership structure—under which our Chief Executive Officer also serves as Chairman of the Board and a Presiding Director assumes specific responsibilities on behalf of the independent directors—is effective, provides the appropriate balance of authority between those persons charged with overseeing our company and those who manage it on a day-to-day basis and achieves the optimal governance model for us and for our stockholders.

Under our Fifth Amended and Restated By-Laws, as amended (our “By-Laws”), and our Guidelines on Governance, our Board has discretion to determine whether to separate or combine the roles of Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board as part of its leadership structure evaluation. Ms. Cafaro has served in both capacities since 2003, and our Board continues to believe that her combined role is most advantageous to us and our stockholders. Ms. Cafaro possesses extensive knowledge of the issues, opportunities and risks facing us, our business and our industry and has consistently demonstrated the vision and leadership necessary to focus the Board’s time and attention on the most critical matters and to facilitate constructive dialogue among Board members on strategic issues. Moreover, the combined roles enable decisive leadership, clear accountability and consistent communication of our message and strategy to all of our stakeholders. These leadership attributes are uniquely important to our company given the value to our business of opportunistic capital markets execution, our history of rapid and significant growth, and our culture of proactive engagement and risk management.

In connection with Ms. Cafaro’s service as our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, our Guidelines on Governance require that the independent members of our Board annually select one independent director to serve as Presiding Director, whose specific responsibilities include, among other things, presiding at all meetings of our Board at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions and all other meetings of the independent directors. The Presiding Director also serves as liaison between the Chairman and the independent directors, approves information sent to the Board and approves Board meeting agendas and meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items. The Presiding Director has authority to call meetings of the independent directors and, if requested by major stockholders, ensures that he or she is available for consultation and direct communication with stockholders. In addition, the Presiding Director reviews with our General Counsel potential conflicts of interest and has such other duties as may be assigned from time to time by the independent directors or the Board. Although the Presiding Director is elected on an annual basis, the Board generally expects that he or she will serve for more than one year. James D. Shelton was elected on May 10, 2016 to serve as our Presiding Director in replacement of Douglas Crocker II, who served as our Presiding Director from 2003 until his retirement in 2016.

Table of Contents

Committees

Our Board has five standing committees that perform certain delegated functions for the Board: the Audit and Compliance Committee (the “Audit Committee”); the Compensation Committee; the Executive Committee; the Investment Committee; and the Nominating Committee. Each of the Audit, Compensation and Nominating Committees operates under a written charter that is available in the Corporate Governance section of our website at  www.ventasreit.com/investor-relations/corporate-governance . We also provide copies of the Audit, Compensation and Nominating Committee charters, without charge, upon request to our Corporate Secretary at Ventas, Inc., 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654. Information on our website is not a part of this Proxy Statement. Additional details regarding the five standing committees of our Board are described below.

Board and Committee Meetings

Our Board held a total of eight meetings during 2016. Evidencing a strong commitment to our company, each director attended at least 75% of the total meetings of the Board and the committees on which he or she served that were held during 2016. The table below provides current membership and 2016 meeting information for each of our Board committees:

* Independent Director

† Presiding Director

Our independent directors meet in executive session, outside the presence of management, at each regularly scheduled quarterly Board meeting and at other times as necessary or desirable. The Presiding Director (currently Mr. Shelton) chairs all regularly scheduled executive sessions of the Board and all other meetings of the independent directors. Members of our Audit, Compensation and Nominating Committees also meet in executive session, outside the presence of management, at each regularly scheduled committee meeting and at other times as necessary or desirable.

We strongly encourage, but do not require, directors to attend our annual meetings of stockholders. Eight of our nine directors who were nominated for reelection at our 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders attended that meeting.

How to Communicate with Directors

Stockholders and other parties interested in communicating directly with our Board or any director on Board-related issues may do so by writing to Board of Directors, c/o Corporate Secretary, Ventas, Inc., 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654, or by submitting an e-mail to bod@ventasreit.com. Additionally, stockholders and other parties interested in communicating directly with the Presiding Director of the Board or with the independent directors as a group may do so by writing to Presiding Director, Ventas, Inc., 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654, or by sending an e-mail to independentbod@ventasreit.com. Communications addressed to our Board or individual members of the Board are screened by our Corporate Secretary for appropriateness before distributing to the Board, or to any individual director or directors, as applicable.

Table of Contents

AUDIT AND COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE

Our Audit Committee assists our Board in fulfilling its responsibilities relating to our accounting and financial reporting practices, including oversight of the quality and integrity of our financial statements; our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; the qualifications, independence and performance of our independent registered public accounting firm and the performance of our internal audit function.

The Audit Committee maintains free and open communication with the Board, our independent registered public accounting firm, our internal auditor and our financial and accounting management. Our Audit Committee meets separately in executive session, outside the presence of management, with each of our independent registered public accounting firm and our internal auditor at each regularly scheduled meeting and at other times as necessary or desirable.

Our Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is independent and satisfies the independence standards of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related rules and regulations of the SEC and the NYSE listing standards, including the additional independence requirements for audit committee members. The Board has also determined that each member of the Audit Committee is financially literate and qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” for purposes of the SEC’s rules.

The Nominating Committee recognizes that Audit Committee members must have adequate time to devote to Audit Committee activities, given that such responsibilities command a significant portion of directors’ time. Accordingly, the Company maintains a policy prohibiting Audit Committee members from simultaneously serving on more than two public company audit committees other than the Company’s. The policy grandfathers public company audit committees for which directors are serving as of the policy adoption date.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Our Board has delegated to our Executive Committee the power to direct the management of our business and affairs in emergency situations during intervals between meetings of the Board, except for matters specifically reserved for our Board and its other committees. The Executive Committee exercises its delegated authority only under extraordinary circumstances and has not held a meeting since 2002.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

Our Compensation Committee has primary responsibility for the design, review, approval and administration of all aspects of our executive compensation program. The Compensation Committee reviews the performance of, and makes all compensation decisions for, each of our executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer. Our Compensation Committee also reviews the performance of, and makes compensation recommendations to the independent members of our Board for, our Chief Executive Officer.

The Compensation Committee meets throughout the year to review our compensation philosophy and its continued alignment with our business strategy and to consider and approve our executive compensation program for the subsequent year. With the assistance of a nationally-recognized, independent compensation consultant, the Compensation Committee discusses changes, if any, to the program structure, assesses the appropriate peer companies for benchmarking purposes, sets base salaries and incentive award opportunities, establishes the applicable performance measures and related goals under our incentive plans, evaluates performance in relation to the established measures and goals and determines annual cash and long-term equity incentive awards for our executive officers.

Our executive officers provide support to our Compensation Committee by coordinating meeting logistics, preparing and disseminating relevant financial and other information regarding us and the companies in our compensation peer group as a supplement to the comparative market data prepared by our independent compensation consultant and making recommendations with respect to performance measures and related goals. Our Chief Executive Officer attends meetings at the Compensation Committee’s request and recommends to the Compensation Committee compensation changes affecting our other executive officers. However, our Chief Executive Officer plays no role in setting her own compensation. At various times, our General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, our Assistant General Counsel, Corporate & Securities and our Chief Human Resources Officer may also attend meetings at the Compensation

Table of Contents

Committee’s request to act as secretary and record the minutes of the meetings, provide updates on legal developments and make presentations regarding certain organizational matters. Our Compensation Committee meets separately in executive session, without management present, at each regularly scheduled meeting and at other times as necessary or desirable.

The Compensation Committee meets during the first quarter of each year, typically in January, to review the achievement of pre-established performance goals for the prior year, to determine the appropriate annual cash and long-term equity incentive awards for executive officers based on that prior-year performance and, as appropriate, to approve grants of equity awards to our executive officers. Our executive officers provide support to our Compensation Committee in this process, and the Chief Executive Officer makes incentive award recommendations with respect to the other executive officers.

Our Board has determined that each member of the Compensation Committee is independent and satisfies the independence standards of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the related NYSE listing standards, including the additional independence requirements for compensation committee members. The Board has also determined that each member of the Compensation Committee meets the additional requirements for “outside directors” set forth in Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and “non-employee directors” set forth in Rule 16b-3 under the Exchange Act.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

During the year ended December 31, 2016, Ms. Martino and Messrs. Crocker (prior to his May 2016 retirement), Gellert, Gilchrist and Shelton served on our Compensation Committee. No member of the Compensation Committee is, or has been, employed by us or our subsidiaries or is an employee of any entity for which any of our executive officers serves on the board of directors.

Independent Compensation Consultant

Under its charter, our Compensation Committee has authority to retain, and approve the terms of engagement and fees paid to, compensation consultants, outside counsel and other advisors that the Compensation Committee deems appropriate, in its sole discretion, to assist it in discharging its duties. Any compensation consultant engaged by our Compensation Committee reports to the Compensation Committee and receives no fees from us that are unrelated to its role as advisor to our Board and its committees. Our Compensation Committee meets regularly with the compensation consultant without management present. Although a compensation consultant may periodically interact with company employees to gather and review information related to our executive compensation program, this work is done at the direction and subject to the oversight of the Compensation Committee. Under the Compensation Committee charter, any compensation consultant retained by our Compensation Committee must be independent, as determined annually by the Compensation Committee in its reasonable business judgment, considering the specific independence factors set forth in Rule 10C-1 under the Exchange Act and all other relevant facts and circumstances.

Pearl Meyer (“PM”) has served as our Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant since 2006. In 2016, our Compensation Committee retained PM to advise it and the independent members of our Board, as applicable, on matters related to our executive compensation levels and program design for 2016 and 2017. Our Compensation Committee reviews the scope of work provided by PM on an annual basis and, in connection with PM’s engagement in 2016, determined that PM met the independence criteria under the Compensation Committee charter. PM did not perform any consulting services unrelated to executive compensation for us during the year ended December 31, 2016, and PM’s work for the Board and its committees has raised no conflict of interest.

INVESTMENT COMMITTEE

The function of our Investment Committee is to review and approve proposed acquisitions and dispositions of properties and other investments meeting applicable criteria, in accordance with our Amended and Restated Investment and Divestiture Approval Policy.

NOMINATING AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE

Our Nominating Committee oversees our corporate policies and other corporate governance matters, as well as

Table of Contents

matters relating to the practices and procedures of our Board, including the following: identifying, selecting and recommending to the Board qualified director-nominees; making recommendations to the Board regarding its committee structure and composition; reviewing and making recommendations to the Board regarding non-employee director compensation; overseeing an annual evaluation of the Board and its committees; developing and recommending to the Board a set of corporate governance guidelines and the corporate code of ethics; and generally advising the Board on corporate governance and related matters.

Our Board has determined that each member of the Nominating Committee is independent and satisfies the NYSE listing standards.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Governance Policies

Our Guidelines on Governance reflect the fundamental corporate governance principles by which our Board and its committees operate. These guidelines set forth general practices the Board and its committees follow with respect to structure, function, organization, composition and conduct. These guidelines are reviewed at least annually by the Nominating Committee and are updated periodically in response to changing regulatory requirements, evolving corporate governance practices, input from our stockholders and otherwise as circumstances warrant.

Our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct sets forth the legal and ethical standards for conducting our business to which our directors, officers and employees, including our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and the directors, officers and employees of our subsidiaries must adhere. Our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct covers all significant areas of professional conduct, including employment practices, conflicts of interest, unfair or unethical use of corporate opportunities, protection of confidential information and other company assets, compliance with applicable laws and regulations, political activities and other public policy matters, and proper and timely reporting of financial results. See also “Public Policy Matters.”

Our Guidelines on Governance and our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct are available in the Corporate Governance section of our website at www.ventasreit.com/investor-relations/corporate-governance. We also provide copies of our Guidelines on Governance and our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, without charge, upon request to our Corporate Secretary at Ventas, Inc., 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654. Waivers from, and amendments to, our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct that apply to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer or persons performing similar functions will be timely posted on our website at  www.ventasreit.com. The information on our website is not a part of this Proxy Statement.

Transactions with Related Persons

Our written Policy on Transactions with Related Persons requires that any transaction involving us in which any of our directors, officers or employees (or their immediate family members) has a direct or indirect material interest be approved or ratified by the Audit Committee or the disinterested members of our Board. Our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct requires our directors, officers and employees to disclose in writing to our General Counsel any existing or proposed transaction in which he or she has a personal interest, or in which there is or might appear to be a conflict of interest by reason of his or her connection to another business organization. Our General Counsel reviews these matters with the Presiding Director to determine whether the transaction raises a conflict of interest that warrants review and approval by the Audit Committee or the disinterested members of the Board. In determining whether to approve or ratify a transaction, the Audit Committee or disinterested members of the Board consider all relevant facts and circumstances available to them and other factors they deem appropriate.

We did not have any related party transactions during 2016.

Risk Management

Management has primary responsibility for identifying and managing our exposure to risk, subject to active oversight by our Board of the processes we establish to assess, monitor and mitigate that exposure. The Board, directly and through its committees, routinely discusses with management our significant enterprise risks and reviews the guidelines, policies and procedures we have in place to address those risks, such as our approval process for acquisitions, dispositions and other investments. At Board and committee meetings, directors engage in comprehensive

Table of Contents

analyses and dialogue regarding specific areas of risk following receipt of written materials and in-depth presentations from management and third-party experts, including an enhanced annual enterprise risk management process and presentation to the Board to better identify risks, owners and mitigants. This process enables our Board to focus on the strategic, financial, operational, legal, regulatory and other risks that are most significant to us and our business in terms of likelihood and potential impact and ensures that our enterprise risks are well understood, mitigated to the extent reasonable and consistent with the Board’s view of our risk profile and risk tolerance.

In addition to the overall risk oversight function administered directly by our Board, each of our Audit, Compensation, Nominating and Investment Committees exercises its own oversight related to the risks associated with the particular responsibilities of that committee:

The chairs of these committees report on such matters to the full Board at each regularly scheduled Board meeting and other times as appropriate. Our Board believes that this division of responsibilities is the most effective approach for identifying and addressing risk, and through Ms. Cafaro’s combined role as Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, our Board leadership structure appropriately supports the Board’s role in risk oversight by facilitating prompt attention by the Board and its committees to the significant enterprise risks identified by management in our day-to-day operations.

Compensation Risk Assessment

As part of its risk oversight role, our Compensation Committee annually considers whether our compensation policies and practices for all employees, including our executive officers, create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our company. In conducting its risk assessment in 2016, the Compensation Committee reviewed a report prepared by management regarding our existing compensation plans and programs, including our severance and change-in-control arrangements, in the context of our business risk environment. In its review, the Compensation Committee noted several design features of our compensation programs that reduce the likelihood of excessive risk-taking, including, but not limited to, the following:

Table of Contents

Based on its evaluation, the Compensation Committee has determined, in its reasonable business judgment, that our compensation practices and policies for all employees do not create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our company and instead promote behaviors that support long-term sustainability and creation of stockholder value.

Public Policy Matters

We are committed to ethical business conduct and expect our directors, officers and employees to act with integrity and to conduct themselves and our business in a way that protects our reputation for fairness and honesty. Consistent with these principles, in our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, our Global Anti-Corruption Policy and our Political Contribution, Expenditure and Activity Policy, we have established the policies and practices described below with respect to political contributions and other public policy matters.

Political Contributions and Expenditures

We do not use corporate funds or resources for direct contributions to political candidates, parties or campaigns, other than occasional de minimis use of our property, such as using a conference room. Corporate resources include non-financial donations, such as the use of our property in a political campaign or our employees’ use of work time and telephones to solicit for a political cause or candidate.

Promotion of Company Interests

We do not have a political action committee. However, we may advocate a position, express a view or take other appropriate action with respect to legislative or political matters affecting our company or our interests. We may also ask our employees to make personal contact with governmental officials or to write letters to present our position on specific issues. Any such advocacy is done in compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Political Activities by Company Personnel

We believe that our directors, officers and employees have rights and responsibilities to participate in political activities as citizens, including voting in elections, keeping informed on political matters, serving on civic bodies and contributing financially to, and participating in the campaigns of, the political candidates of their choice. Accordingly, our directors, officers and employees are not constrained from engaging in political activities, making political contributions, expressing political views or taking action on any political or legislative matter, so long as they are acting in their individual capacity, on their own time and at their own expense. Directors, officers and employees acting in their individual capacity must not give the impression that they are speaking on our behalf or representing our company in such activities.

Relationships with Government Officials

Our directors, officers and employees may not maintain any relationship or take any action with respect to public officials that could impugn our integrity or reputation. In particular, our directors, officers and employees may not offer, promise or give anything of value, including payments, entertainment and gifts, to any government official, employee, agent or other intermediary of the United States government or any domestic or foreign government.

Table of Contents

OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Set forth below is certain biographical information about our executive officers. Ages shown for all executive officers are as of the date of the 2017 Annual Meeting.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis and, based on such review and discussion, has recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement and incorporated by reference into the 2016 Form 10-K.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

Jay M. Gellert, Chair

Richard I. Gilchrist

Roxanne M. Martino

James D. Shelton

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) provides a detailed description of our executive compensation philosophy, objectives and programs, the compensation decisions made under those programs and the factors considered by our Compensation Board Members in making those decisions. The CD&A focuses on the compensation of our Named Executive Officers for 2016, who were:

As in previous years, we awarded compensation to our Named Executive Officers for 2016 based on compensation policies that closely link compensation to performance. These policies, in planned combination, generate rewards for achievement of high-level company and individual performance and discourage excessive short-term risk taking. We believe this balance is essential to align management with the long-term interests of our stockholders.

Executive Summary

Our executive compensation programs are designed to attract, retain and motivate talented executives, to reward executives for the achievement of pre-established company and tailored individual goals consistent with our strategic plan and to link compensation to company performance. We compensate our executives primarily through base salary, annual cash incentive compensation and long-term equity incentive compensation. Our executive compensation philosophy emphasizes performance-based incentive compensation over fixed cash compensation, so that the vast majority of total direct compensation is variable and not guaranteed. A significant percentage of incentive compensation historically has been in the form of equity awards granted to reward past performance. Even though these equity awards were fully earned for performance that has already been achieved at the time of grant, a substantial portion of the awards vests over time to provide additional retention benefits and create greater alignment with stockholders. We believe this structure appropriately focuses our executive officers on the creation of long-term value and encourages prudent risk evaluation.

2016 Performance

Our Compensation Board Members view performance for compensatory purposes in two primary ways: (1) returns to stockholders over time, both on an absolute basis and relative to other companies, including S&P 500 companies, large-cap REITs and our compensation peer group (see “Benchmarking and Comparable Companies”) and (2) strategic, financial and operating performance, including results against our growth targets.

Table of Contents

Returns to Stockholders.  Our long history of delivering sustained, superior returns to stockholders continued in 2016 with the following:

Strategic, Financial and Operating Performance.  We delivered exceptional TSR and strategic, financial and operating performance in 2016. Our 2016 strategic, financial and operating performance highlights included the following:

Table of Contents

The 2016 compensation decisions made by our Compensation Board Members reflected our level of achievement overall with respect to the pre-established measures and goals under our annual cash and long-term equity incentive plans and the individual performance and contributions of our Named Executive Officers to our strong financial and operating performance during the year.

Table of Contents

2016 Executive Compensation

In 2016, our compensation decisions once again reflected strong alignment between pay and performance. In determining the incentive compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers for 2016, our Compensation Board Members rigorously evaluated company and individual performance relative to the pre-established measures and goals under our annual cash and long-term equity incentive plans. Our TSR placed us in the top quartile among our broader peer group for the one-year period ended December 31, 2016 and first among the three large-cap diversified healthcare REITs for the one- and three-year periods. In 2016, we delivered excellent strategic, financial and operating performance, including 5% normalized FFO growth, 2.7% same-store cash flow growth and strengthened our balance sheet, as illustrated by improvement in our net debt to adjusted pro forma EBITDA ratio from 6.1x to 5.7x.

Our Compensation Committee and Board considered all of the factors established under the 2016 Plan and have discretion to consider other relevant factors, although they place the greatest significance on the achievements noted in the “2016 Performance” section above.

2016 Base Salary.  Following a review of compensation data for peers with substantially similar roles and responsibilities (as described below under “Benchmarking and Comparable Companies”), each of our Named Executive Officers (other than Ms. Cafaro) received an increase in base salary for 2016 to remain near the market median.

2016 Annual Cash Incentive Awards.  Cash incentive awards granted to our Named Executive Officers for 2016 performance were earned at target or between the target and maximum levels, ranging from 100% to 149% of their respective target award opportunities, based on our performance with respect to pre-established company financial measures, as further described below in the “Annual Cash Incentive Compensation — Opportunities, Measures and Actual Performance” section.

2016 Long-Term Equity Incentive Awards, Granted in 2017.   Long-term equity incentive awards granted in the form of restricted stock and stock options to our Named Executive Officers in 2017 for 2016 performance were earned between the target and maximum levels, ranging from 116% to 137% of their respective target award opportunities, based on our performance with respect to pre-established quantitative measures, as further described below in the “Long-Term Equity Incentive Compensation — Opportunities, Measures and Performance” section.

Pay-for-Performance Alignment

The graph below illustrates our long-term pay-for-performance alignment by comparing our Chief Executive Officer’s total direct compensation to our TSR performance (indexed to a 2011 base year) for each of the past five years.

Table of Contents

This graph differs from compensation reported in the 2016 Summary Compensation Table in that it aligns the value of long-term equity incentive awards with the performance year for which they were earned, rather than the year in which they were granted (e.g., long-term equity incentive awards granted in January 2017 for 2016 performance are shown in the graph above as 2016 compensation), consistent with the manner in which our Compensation Board Members evaluated compensation and pay-for-performance under the 2016 compensation plan for our Named Executive Officers.

Compensation Policies and Practices—Good Governance

Consistent with our commitment to strong corporate governance and responsiveness to our stockholders, in 2016 our Board maintained the following compensation policies and practices to drive performance and serve our stockholders’ long-term interests:

Table of Contents

Responsive Redesign Following 2016 Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation and Stockholder Outreach

We submit an advisory vote to our stockholders on an annual basis to approve our executive compensation. At our 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, holders of 68% of the shares represented at the meeting voted to approve, on an advisory basis, our executive compensation. Although a significant majority continued to support our executive compensation program, the result of the 2016 vote was in contrast to the strong support we received in prior years, specifically 95% in 2015 and 90% in 2014. The level of support declined despite (a) the absence of material changes to our general executive compensation program between the 2015 and 2016 Annual Meetings, (b) in the view of our Board, the consistent strong alignment between our executive pay and performance (see “Strong Pay-for-Performance Alignment” chart above) and (c) the significant reduction in long-term equity incentive awards granted to our Named Executive Officers in early 2016 resulting from our bottom quartile TSR performance as measured against our peer group for the one- and three-year measurement periods ending December 31, 2015, despite our outstanding long-term TSR outperformance.

We have continued to gain valuable insight from engaging with our stockholders on a consistent basis. We have conducted broad investor outreach programs on three separate occasions. In late 2015 and early 2016, the Chair of our Compensation Committee, our independent compensation consultant to the Compensation Committee and members of our Legal team reached out to 27 of our largest stockholders (holding more than 60% of our outstanding shares of common stock) to discuss our executive compensation program and invited such stockholders to provide us with feedback on our executive compensation program and corporate governance practices.

After filing our 2016 Proxy Statement, the Chair of our Compensation Committee, our independent compensation consultant to the Compensation Committee and members of our Legal team again reached out to our 30 largest stockholders (holding more than 60% of our outstanding shares of common stock) during April 2016 to discuss, and solicit feedback regarding potential changes to, our executive compensation program. We invited such stockholders to provide us with constructive comments regarding our executive compensation program and corporate governance practices.

In early 2017, a combination of the Chair of our Compensation Committee and members of our Legal team again reached out to our 32 largest stockholders (holding 60% of our outstanding shares of common stock) to discuss, and solicit feedback regarding our executive compensation program. We invited such stockholders to provide us with constructive comments regarding our executive compensation program and corporate governance practices.

Based on these discussions, we learned that our stockholders:

Table of Contents

We also received constructive feedback from our investors. After careful consideration of this feedback, we have decided to make significant and responsive modifications to our executive compensation program, beginning with the 2017 compensation cycle.

The key features of the new program are consistent with the feedback we have received from our largest stockholders and are described in detail below in the section entitled, “Going Forward: Responsive Redesign of Long-Term Incentive Compensation.”

We believe this redesigned program enhances alignment of pay and performance, is responsive to investor feedback and provides simpler, clear objectives, while achieving our goals of attracting, retaining and motivating talented executives and rewarding superior performance in the context of our business risk environment.

Objectives of Our Compensation Program

We recognize that effective compensation strategies are critical to recruiting, incentivizing and retaining key employees who contribute to our long-term success and thereby create value for our stockholders. Accordingly, our

Table of Contents

compensation program is designed to achieve the following primary objectives:

We align the interests of our executive officers and stockholders by maintaining a performance- and achievement-oriented environment that provides executives with the opportunity to earn market-competitive levels of cash and equity compensation for strong performance measured against key strategic, financial and operating goals that create long-term stockholder value.

Benchmarking and Comparable Companies

Our Compensation Committee retained PM as its independent compensation consultant to advise it and the independent members of our Board, as applicable, on matters related to our Named Executive Officers’ compensation levels and program design for 2016. Our Compensation Committee has reviewed PM’s independence and determined that PM met the independence criteria under the Compensation Committee charter and that PM’s engagement raised no conflict of interest.

For 2016 benchmarking purposes, PM provided our Compensation Board Members with comparative market data on compensation practices and programs based on its analysis of a group of peer companies (the “Comparable Companies”) and provided guidance on compensation trends and best practices. Using this market data, PM advised the Compensation Board Members and made recommendations with respect to program design and setting base salaries and incentive award opportunity levels for our Named Executive Officers for 2016.

In determining 2016 compensation targets for our Named Executive Officers, our Compensation Committee, in consultation with PM, considered the competitive positioning of our executive compensation levels relative to compensation data for the Comparable Companies with respect to the following components of pay: base salary; total annual compensation (base salary plus annual incentive awards); long-term equity incentives (annualized expected value of long-term equity incentive awards) and total direct compensation (base salary plus annual incentive awards and annualized expected value of long-term equity incentive awards). Consistent with our compensation philosophy, our Compensation Committee reviewed each element of pay in the context of the Comparable Companies, but targeted approximately the median of the Comparable Companies on an overall, total direct compensation basis, subject to adjustment based on the unique skills, expertise and individual contributions of each Named Executive Officer. Our 2016 executive compensation program was designed to deliver compensation levels above or below these targets if performance exceeded or failed to achieve the goals established for the annual cash and long-term equity incentive awards. We believe this methodology is appropriate for our operating style and reflects the need to attract, retain and stretch top executive talent.

The group of Comparable Companies consists of large-cap REITs in our healthcare sector and different sectors (such as office, retail and lodging), but otherwise similar to us in terms of FFO and generally falling within a range of 40% to 250% of our enterprise value, market capitalization and total assets. Because these companies’ values may rise or fall based on underlying trends that are different from those affecting healthcare real estate, our total returns may vary significantly from theirs. Our Compensation Committee annually reviews the Comparable Companies to ensure that their

Table of Contents

size and operations remain comparable to ours and may change the composition of the group from time to time as appropriate. In July 2015, the Compensation Committee approved the 15 companies identified below as the appropriate Comparable Companies for 2016 compensation purposes. These companies are the same companies used by the Compensation Committee for 2015 compensation purposes. The Comparable Companies reported compensation data for executive positions with responsibilities similar in breadth and scope to those of our executive officers, and we believe these companies generally competed with us for executive talent and stockholder investment in 2016.

2017 Comparable Companies

In December 2016, the Compensation Committee examined the existing peer group and approved changes to the 15 Comparable Companies identified above for 2017 compensation purposes. The Compensation Committee removed Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. and Kimco Realty Corporation and added Crown Castle International Corp. and Equinix, Inc. The Compensation Committee believes this revised group of Comparable Companies provides a more accurate representation of our peer companies based on the size and complexity of the constituent companies (including participation in joint ventures) and provides a more accurate pool from which we compete for executive talent and stockholder investment.

Compensation Mix

Our executive compensation philosophy promotes a compensation mix that emphasizes variable pay and long-term stockholder value. We believe that an emphasis on incentive compensation creates greater alignment with the interests of our stockholders, ensures that our business strategy is executed by decision-makers in a manner that focuses on the creation of long-term value rather than only short-term results, and encourages prudent evaluation of risks. Accordingly, our compensation structure is designed such that a significant portion of Named Executive Officers’ total direct compensation is in the form of equity awards. Prior to 2017, these equity awards were earned based on past performance and vested over time. Even though these equity awards were fully earned for performance that has already been achieved at the time of grant, the vesting schedule was designed to provide additional retention benefits and create greater alignment with stockholders. In response to feedback received from many of our investors, for 2017 and thereafter, equity awards will be earned and vest based on future performance over a period of three years from the grant date.

The following charts illustrate each Named Executive Officer’s base salary, target annual cash incentive compensation and target long-term equity incentive compensation as a percentage of his or her target total direct compensation for 2016. Ms. Cafaro’s target total direct compensation reflects a heavier weight on long-term equity incentive compensation because our Compensation Board Members believe that, due to her leadership role as our Chief Executive Officer, her compensation structure should reflect even greater alignment with our stockholders.

Table of Contents

Elements of Our Compensation Program

For 2016, the compensation provided to our executive officers consisted of the same elements generally available to our non-executive officers: base salary; annual cash incentive compensation; long-term equity incentive compensation; and other perquisites and benefits.

Base Salary

The base salary payable to each Named Executive Officer provides a fixed component of compensation that reflects the executive’s position and responsibilities. Base salary is generally targeted to approximate the competitive market median of the Comparable Companies, but may deviate from this target based on an individual’s sustained performance, contributions, leadership, experience, expertise and specific roles within our company as compared to the benchmark data. Our Compensation Committee reviews base salaries annually and may make adjustments to better match competitive market levels or to recognize an executive’s professional growth and development or increased responsibilities. The Compensation Committee also considers the success of each executive officer in developing and executing our strategic plans, exercising leadership and creating stockholder value.

In determining 2016 base salaries for our Named Executive Officers, our Compensation Committee analyzed base salary information of the Comparable Companies contained in a report prepared by PM. Although the Compensation Committee periodically considers information from REIT industry and other compensation surveys, it places primary emphasis on publicly-available data from the Comparable Companies’ proxy statements and other SEC filings, which is more detailed by individual executive officer position than the data typically provided in compensation surveys.

For 2016, our Compensation Board Members approved the following base salary increases for certain of our Named Executive Officers:

Table of Contents

At these levels, the Compensation Committee considered each Named Executive Officer’s base salary to be within the competitive range given each individual’s unique skills, expertise and individual contributions. The Compensation Committee did not adjust Ms. Cafaro’s base salary in 2016.

For 2017, as part of an overall strategy to bring our Named Executive Officers’ total direct compensation opportunities approximately to the median of our peer group, our Compensation Board Members approved the following base salary levels for our Named Executive Officers:

At these levels, the Compensation Committee considered each Named Executive Officer’s 2017 base salary to continue to be within the competitive range given each individual’s unique skills, expertise and individual contributions. Mr. Cobb received a larger increase based on his outstanding performance with respect to critical strategic transactions and an increase in his aggregate responsibilities within the Company, and as a result of a change in his compensation benchmarking position-matching to more accurately reflect his role within the Company. For the second consecutive year, the Compensation Committee did not adjust Ms. Cafaro’s base salary in 2017, meaning that her base salary has remained flat since 2015.

Annual Cash Incentive Compensation — Opportunities, Measures and Actual Performance

We provide our Named Executive Officers with an annual opportunity to earn cash incentive awards for the achievement of pre-established company financial goals and tailored individual objectives. At the beginning of each performance year, our Compensation Board Members approve specific performance measures, goals and weightings and an award opportunity range (expressed as multiples of base salary and corresponding to threshold, target and maximum levels of performance) for each Named Executive Officer.

Cash incentive awards granted to our Named Executive Officers for 2016 performance were earned at target or between the target and maximum levels, ranging from 100% to 149% of their respective target award opportunities. We achieved between target and maximum performance for normalized FFO and exceeded maximum performance with respect to fixed charge coverage (each goal as further described below) that together accounted for 65% of the award opportunity (or 35% in the case of Mr. Lillibridge). Performance with respect to MOB operations financial metrics, which accounted for 40% of Mr. Lillibridge’s 2016 annual cash incentive award opportunity, ranged from below threshold to between target and maximum, resulting in an overall payout below threshold for this portion of his award. With respect to the tailored individual objectives that accounted for the remaining 35% of the award opportunity (or 25% in the case of Mr. Lillibridge), our Compensation Board Members determined that each Named Executive Officer achieved between target and maximum performance, depending on his or her unique contributions to our success.

Table of Contents

2016 Award Opportunities.  In December 2015, our Compensation Board Members approved the 2016 annual cash incentive award opportunities for our Named Executive Officers. The 2016 annual cash incentive award opportunities for Ms. Cafaro and Messrs. Probst, Riney and Cobb remained unchanged from 2015 opportunities as such opportunities were set following our spin-off of Care Capital Properties, Inc. in 2015 (the “Spin-off”). Mr. Lillibridge received an increase to his annual cash incentive award opportunity by 25 basis points at each of the threshold (from 100% to 125%), target (from 150% to 175%) and maximum (from 225% to 250%) levels, effective as of January 1, 2016, as part of an overall strategy to target total direct compensation at approximately the market median and to provide attractive variable incentive compensation opportunities for outperformance.

Ms. Cafaro’s annual cash incentive opportunity structure has greater leverage and a wider range of outcomes than the structures of our other Named Executive Officers in support of the view that the Chief Executive Officer’s compensation should be more strongly aligned with stockholders than our other executive officers.

Performance Measures and Results.  Below is a summary of the annual cash incentive plan measures and goals approved by our Compensation Board Members, the relative weighting for each performance measure, the reasons why we consider each performance measure to be an important component of our pay-for-performance philosophy, and our results with respect to those measures. Consistent with our compensation philosophy, the 2016 annual cash incentive plan measures and goals were determined taking into consideration our strategic plan and were designed to be

Table of Contents

challenging, but also to discourage excessive risk-taking. Although these performance measures focus on shorter-term results, they have a counterbalancing effect on each other. They incentivize our Named Executive Officers to effectively meet rapidly changing market and business conditions and make appropriate business adjustments that benefit the long-term interests of our stockholders.

In the first quarter of the year following the performance year, each Named Executive Officer’s performance is carefully evaluated with respect to the applicable pre-established measures and goals to determine the earned value of the individual’s annual cash incentive award, if any, within the established award opportunity range. For 2016, we achieved between target and maximum performance for normalized FFO and exceeded maximum performance with respect to fixed charge coverage, as summarized below.

Normalized FFO Per Share (Cash)

Normalized FFO per share, excluding non-cash items,

for the year ended December 31, 2016

Weighting: 50% (27% for Mr. Lillibridge)

Goals:

Why does this measure matter?  FFO is a common measure of operating performance for REITs because it excludes, among other items, the effect of gains and losses from real estate sales and real estate depreciation and amortization to allow investors, analysts and management to compare operating performance among companies and across time periods on a consistent basis. A REIT’s FFO can have a significant impact on the trading price of its common stock and, therefore, its TSR. Normalized FFO is the main measure the Company uses in its publicly-reported earnings and is defined as FFO excluding certain items, such as non-cash income tax items and deal costs/expenses. The maximum performance goal represented a 6% increase over 2015 comparable normalized FFO per share (after arithmetically adjusting to exclude the impact of the Spin-off), which the Committee believes is appropriately challenging in the current economic and interest rate environment for healthcare REITs. In setting the threshold, target and maximum performance levels, the Committee considers the Company’s business model, growth rates of peers, size, and the asset classes in which it operates, as well as the desired tradeoffs between growth in FFO per share and maintaining a low risk

Table of Contents

profile through sound investments. With respect to growth rates of peers, over the past five years our normalized FFO per diluted share compound annual growth rate has been above the peer group median, which is consistent with actual payouts at above target levels.

Result:  Between Target and Maximum Performance. Our year-over-year normalized FFO per diluted share was $4.13. The variance between our actual results and our pre-established goals was largely due to actions led by our Named Executive Officers, including completing more accretive acquisitions, generating more income from active asset management, creating organizational efficiencies and excellence in capital markets execution.

Fixed Charge Coverage (Year End)

Fixed charge coverage ratio as of December 31, 2016

Weighting: 15% (8% for Mr. Lillibridge)

Goals:

Why does this measure matter?  Fixed charge coverage ratio reflects the strength of our balance sheet and our ability to generate sufficient cash flow to meet our debt obligations and continue to pay or increase our dividend. A strong ratio of EBITDA-generation compared to fixed payment obligations—one element of our comprehensive risk management program—is especially important for REITs, which are dividend-paying and required to distribute to stockholders a substantial portion of their annual taxable net income. By maintaining a high fixed charge coverage ratio, we are able to preserve and enhance stockholder value. Even if our EBITDA declines in times of economic cycles or other impacts to our cash flows, high fixed charge coverage of cash flow to fixed obligations should enable us to generate sufficient free cash flow to meet our fixed obligations such as principal and interest payments and at the same time be able to maintain and even increase our dividend, which is an important component of our value proposition (total return) to stockholders. Strong fixed charge coverage also enables us to maintain a strong BBB or better credit rating, which enhances our cost of capital (a critical component of our continued investment strategy) and provides us with more consistent access to the debt capital markets even during periods of capital market disruption. We take a balanced approach to fixed charge coverage by maintaining a strong coverage ratio, while avoiding suboptimal capitalization from an unnecessarily high ratio. On average over the past four years (since fixed charge coverage has been used as an annual incentive measure), we have performed well above the peer group median with respect to this metric, which is consistent with actual payouts at above target levels.

Result:  Exceeded Maximum Performance Goal. As of December 31, 2016, our fixed charge coverage ratio was 4.8x. The variance between our actual results and our pre-established goals was largely due to actions led by our Named Executive Officers, including a reduction in our overall debt levels to appropriately manage risk.

Table of Contents

Lillibridge Financial Performance (Year End)

American Realty Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) Property MOB Cash NOI, Same-Store Cash NOI and Same-Store Occupancy for the year ended December 31, 2016

Weighting: 40% (for Mr. Lillibridge only)

Goals:*

* These goals were established for certain pools of assets and used certain definitions in place on January 1, 2016; they may differ from same-store pools of assets based on asset sales and intended sales, and/or market definitions. Target for HCT NOI was based on growth over 2015 annualized NOI for the HCT acquisition, with target equaling $85.9 million.

Why do these measures matter?  Ensuring that the Company attained cash NOI from the HCT acquisition was important to evaluate the successful execution and integration of the HCT assets, approximately half of which were MOBs. Same-Store MOB Cash NOI and Same-Store Occupancy are important measures of the MOB business’s ability to generate internal organic growth and maximize the productivity of these assets.

Individual Performance

Individual performance under management

objectives established for each Named Executive Officer

Weighting: 35% (25% for Mr. Lillibridge)

Goals:

Individual objectives relate to areas of special emphasis within the executive’s particular responsibilities and duties, such as achieving certain cost, NOI or revenue targets, or achieving other extraordinary or unusual accomplishments or contributions, in light of our business risk environment.

Why does this measure matter?  A review of each Named Executive Officer’s annual accomplishments enables our Compensation Board Members to evaluate the specific contributions of the Named Executive Officer to our success and more closely link pay to performance.

Result:  Between Target and Maximum Performance. Each of our Named Executive Officers achieved between target and maximum performance with respect to his or her tailored individual objectives. The significant accomplishments considered by our Compensation Board Members in determining the individual performance component of our Named Executive Officers’ 2016 annual cash incentive awards are summarized below.

Table of Contents