UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant  x                             Filed by a party other than the Registrant  ¨

Check the appropriate box:

OceanFirst Financial Corp.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than The Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

OCEANFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.

975 HOOPER AVENUE

TOMS RIVER, NEW JERSEY 08754-2009

(732) 240-4500

March 30, 201231, 2014

Dear Stockholder:

You are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of OceanFirst Financial Corp. (the “Company”), the holding company for OceanFirst Bank. The Annual Meeting will be held on Thursday, May 10, 2012,8, 2014, at 10:00 a.m., Eastern time, at the Crystal Point Yacht Club, 3900 River Road, at the intersection of State Highway 70, Point Pleasant, New Jersey 08742.

The Notice of Annual Meeting and the proxy statement appearing on the following pages describe the formal business to be transacted at the Annual Meeting. The Company’s directors and officers, as well as a representative of KPMG LLP, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, will be present at the Annual Meeting to respond to appropriate questions.

It is important that your shares are represented this year whether or not you are personally able to attend the meeting. Your cooperation is appreciated since a majority of the common stock must be represented, either in person or by proxy, to constitute a quorum for the conduct of business. You may still vote your shares by proxy by signing and returning the enclosed proxy card promptly.

On behalf of the Board of Directors and all of the employees of the Company and OceanFirst Bank, we thank you for your continued interest and support.

Sincerely yours,

Sincerely yours,

John R. Garbarino

Chairman

John R. Garbarino

Chairman

OCEANFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.

975 HOOPER AVENUE

TOMS RIVER, NEW JERSEY 08754-2009

NOTICE OF 20122014 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TIME AND DATE		10:00 a.m. on Thursday, May 10, 2012.8, 2014.
PLACE		The Crystal Point Yacht Club, 3900 River Road, at the intersection of State Highway 70, Point Pleasant, New Jersey.Jersey 08742.
ITEMS OF BUSINESS		(1)		The election of three directors of the Company;
		(2)		An advisory vote on executive compensation as disclosed in these materials;
		(3)		The ratification of the appointment of KPMG LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2012;2014; and
		(4)		Such other matters as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments thereof. The Board of Directors is not aware of any other business to come before the annual meeting.
RECORD DATE		In order to vote, you must have been a stockholder at the close of business on March 15, 2012.11, 2014.
PROXY VOTING		It is important that your shares be represented and voted at the meeting. You can vote your shares by completing and returning the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction card. Voting instructions are printed on your proxy card and included in the accompanying proxy statement. You can revoke a proxy at any time prior to its exercise at the meeting by following the instructions in the proxy statement.
		Steven J. Tsimbinos
		Corporate Secretary

NOTE: Whether or not you plan to attend the Annual Meeting, please vote by marking, signing, dating and promptly returning the enclosed proxy card in the enclosed envelope.

OCEANFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.

PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

MAY 10, 20128, 2014

This proxy statement is being furnished to stockholders of OceanFirst Financial Corp. (the “Company”), the holding company of OceanFirst Bank (the “Bank”), in connection with the solicitation by the Board of Directors of proxies to be used at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on Thursday, May 10, 2012,8, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern time, at the Crystal Point Yacht Club, 3900 River Road, at the intersection of State Highway 70, Point Pleasant, New Jersey 08742 and at any adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting. The Annual Report of Stockholders, including the consolidated financial statements of the Company and its subsidiaries for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011,2013, accompanies this proxy statement. This proxy statement is first being mailed to record holders on or about March 30, 2012.31, 2014.

VOTING AND PROXY PROCEDURE

Who Can Vote at the Annual Meeting

You are entitled to vote your shares of the Company’s common stock only if the records of the Company show that you held your shares as of the close of business on March 15, 2012.11, 2014. As of the close of business on that date, a total of 18,588,58117,404,764 shares of the Company’s common stock were outstanding and entitled to vote. Each share of common stock has one vote. As provided in Article Fourth of the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation, record holders of common stock who beneficially own in excess of 10% of the outstanding shares of common stock are not entitled to any vote in respect of the shares held in excess of this limit. A person or entity is deemed to beneficially own shares owned by an affiliate of, as well as by persons acting in concert with, such person or entity. The Company’s Certificate of Incorporation authorizes the Board of Directors (i) to make all determinations necessary to implement and apply the limit, including determining whether persons or entities are acting in concert, and (ii) to demand that any person who is reasonably believed to beneficially own stock in excess of the limit supply information to the Company to enable the Board of Directors to implement and apply the limit.

Attending the Annual Meeting

If you are a beneficial owner of the Company’s common stock held by a broker, bank or other nominee (i.e., in “street name”), you will need proof of ownership to be admitted to the Annual Meeting. A recent brokerage statement or letter from a bank or broker are examples of proof of ownership. If you want to vote your shares held in street name in person at the meeting, you must obtain a written proxy in your name from the broker, bank or other nominee who is the record holder of your shares.

Quorum and Vote Required

The Annual Meeting will be held only if there is a quorum. A majority of the outstanding common shares entitled to vote and represented at the Annual Meeting constitutes a quorum. If you return valid proxy instructions or attend the meeting in person, your shares will be counted for purposes of determining whether there is a quorum, even if you abstain from voting. Broker non-votes also will be counted for purposes of determining the existence of a quorum. A broker non-vote occurs when a broker, bank or other nominee holding shares for a beneficial owner does not receive voting instructions from the beneficial owner and casts an “uninstructed” vote.

In voting on Proposal 1, the election of directors, you may vote in favor of all nominees, withhold votes as to all nominees or withhold votes as to a specific nominees.nominee. There is no cumulative voting for the election of directors. Directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting. This means that the nominees receiving the greatest number of votes will be elected. Broker non-votes may not be counted as votes cast in the election of directors. Votes that are withheld and broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the election.

1

In voting on Proposal 2, the advisory vote on executive compensation, and Proposal 3, ratification of the appointment of KPMG LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm, you may vote in favor of each of those proposals, against each of those proposals or abstain from voting. To be approved, these matters require the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting. Broker non-votes will not be counted as votes cast and will have no effect on the voting, while abstentions will have the same effect as a vote against the proposals.

Voting by Proxy; Revocation of Proxy; Board Recommendations

This proxy statement is being sent to you by the Company’s Board of Directors for the purpose of requesting that you allow your shares of Company common stock to be represented at the Annual Meeting by the persons named in the enclosed proxy card. All shares of Company common stock represented at the Annual Meeting by properly executed and dated proxies will be voted in accordance with the instructions indicated on the proxy card. If you sign, date and return a proxy card without giving voting instructions, your shares will be voted as recommended by the Company’s Board of Directors.The Board of Directors recommends the following votes:

If any matters not described in this proxy statement are properly presented at the Annual Meeting, the persons named in the proxy card will use their own judgment to determine how to vote your shares. This includes a motion to adjourn or postpone the Annual Meeting in order to solicit additional proxies. If the Annual Meeting is adjourned or postponed, your Company common stock may be voted by the persons named in the proxy card on the new meeting dates as well, unless you have revoked your proxy. The Company does not know of any other matters to be presented at the Annual Meeting.

You may revoke your proxy at any time before the vote is taken at the Annual Meeting. To revoke your proxy you must either advise the Corporate Secretary of the Company in writing before your common stock has been voted at the Annual Meeting, deliver a later dated and signed proxy card, or attend the Annual Meeting and vote your shares in person. Attendance at the Annual Meeting will not in itself constitute revocation of your proxy.

If your Company common stock is held in “street name,” you will receive instructions from your broker, bank or other nominee that you must follow in order to have your shares voted. Your broker, bank or other nominee may allow you to deliver your voting instructions via the telephone or the Internet. Please see the instruction form provided by your broker, bank or other nominee, that accompanies this proxy statement.

Participants in OceanFirst Financial Corp.’s and OceanFirst Bank’s Benefit Plans

Participants in the OceanFirst Bank Employee Stock Ownership Plan or the OceanFirst Bank Matching Contribution Employee Stock Ownership Plan (collectively the “ESOP”), or the OceanFirst Bank Retirement Plan (the “401(k) Plan”), will receive a voting instruction form for each plan that reflects all shares they may vote under the particular plan. Under the terms of the ESOP, the trustee votes all shares held by the ESOP, but each ESOP participant may direct the trustee how to vote the shares of the Company common stock allocated to his or her account. The ESOP trustee, subject to the exercise of its fiduciary duties, will vote all unallocated shares of Company common stock held by the ESOP and allocated shares of Company common stock for which no voting instructions are received in the same proportion as shares for which it has received timely voting instructions. Under the terms of the 401(k) Plan, a participant is entitled to direct the trustee how to vote the shares of Company common stock in the plan credited to his or her account. The trustee will vote all shares for which no directions are given or for which timely instructions were not received in the same proportion as shares for which such trustee received timely voting instructions. The deadline for returning voting instructions to each plan’s trustee is May 4, 2012.2, 2014.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT VOTING, PLEASE CONTACT THE COMPANY’S PROXY SOLICITOR, GEORGESON INC., BY CALLING TOLL FREE AT (866) 821-2614.(888) 867-6963.

2

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

General

The Company periodically reviews its corporate governance policies and procedures to ensure that the Company meets the highest standards of ethical conduct, reports results with accuracy and transparency, and maintains full compliance with the laws, rules and regulations that govern the Company’s operations. As part of this periodic corporate governance review, the Board of Directors reviews and adopts best corporate governance policies and practices for the Company.

Corporate Governance Policies and Procedures

The Company has adopted a Corporate Governance Policy to govern certain activities, including:

In accordance with the Corporate Governance Policy, at least a majority of the directors on the Board must be “independent directors” as defined in the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Stock Market.

Board Leadership Structure. The Board is led by the Chairman of the Board, John R. Garbarino. Mr. Garbarino also serves as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The Board believes that, because of Mr. Garbarino’s leadership and experience, having combined roles of Chairman and CEO provides an efficient and effective leadership model for the Company by fostering clear accountability, effective decision-making, and alignment on corporate strategy. In 2010, the Company separated the position of President from Chief Executive Officer in part to provide Mr. Garbarino with a greater ability to focus on Board leadership and management oversight. To assure effective independent oversight, the Board has adopted a number of governance practices, including:

3

The Company’s Corporate Governance Policy provides that the Chairman of the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee, currently Mr. John E. Walsh, shall also serve as the Lead Director. The Corporate Governance Policy provides that the duties of the Lead Director include assisting the Board in assuring compliance with and implementation of the Company’s Corporate Governance Policy, coordinating the agenda for and moderating sessions of the Board’s independent directors, and acting as principal liaison on certain issues between the independent and inside directors, including the Chairman of the Board, as applicable.

While the Board believes that the current leadership structure is best suited for the Company, it recognizes that other leadership models in the future might be appropriate, depending on the circumstances. Accordingly, the Board periodically reviews its leadership structure.

Stock Ownership Guidelines. Effective February 21, 2007,The Board, upon the recommendation of the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee, the Boardhas adopted the stock ownership guidelines (the “Guidelines”) for non-employee directors and the NEOs. The Guidelines were adopted to better align the interests of the non-employee directors and the NEOs with those of the Company’s stockholders. The Guidelines provide that each non-employee director mustshall own shares of the Company’s common stock with a market value of at least three times the value of the combined annual director retainers received from the Company and the Bank. Current directors are expected to attain the minimum ownership within three years of adoption of the Guidelines. Newly elected directors mustshall meet the Guidelines within three years of first being elected and qualified. For purposes of the Guidelines, the following shares count towards meeting the ownership requirements: (1) shares beneficially owned by the director and by immediate family members sharing the same household; (2) vested and unvested restricted stock awards; (3) shares acquired upon the exercise of stock options; and (4) shares held in trust where the director or an immediate family member is the beneficiary. Until the Guidelines are met, all retainers will be paid in Company stock, and a director must retain the net shares delivered upon the vesting of restricted share awards or the exercise of stock options. Once achieved, the ownership guidelines mustshall continue to be met during the period the director serves on the Board.

Similarly, the Guidelines requireprovide that the Chief Executive Officer toshall own Company stock with a market value of at least five times his annual base salary. TheTo comply with the Guidelines, each other NEOs mustNEO shall own Company stock with a market value of at least three times theirhis annual base salary. Each officer mustNEO shall meet the share ownership requirements within the later of five years of the Guidelines’ adoption or the officer having become an NEO. Shares that count towards the Guidelines’ requirement include those shares listed under the directors share ownership requirements with the addition of shares held in the officer’s ESOP and 401(k) account and the value of vested and unvested stock options, where such value is calculated as the cumulative expense recognized by the Company on its financial statements. Until the Guidelines are met, an NEO shall retain all of the net vested restricted stock and net shares delivered after exercising stock options. Net shares refers to the shares that remain after shares are sold or netted to pay the exercise price of options and any withholding taxes.

Hedging/Pledging Policy. The Board has adopted a policy that provides that any hedging or pledging of the Company’s common stock by a Board member or senior executive officer requires the prior approval of the Company’s General Counsel.

Board Role in the Oversight of Risk/ Risk Committee

Under the Company’s Corporate Governance Policy, the business and affairs of the Company are managed by the officers under the direction of the Board. The Board is charged with providing oversight of the Company’s risk management processes. The AuditIn January 2013, the Board created the Joint Risk Committee is primarily responsibleof the Company and the Bank (the “Risk Committee”) and delegated to it primary responsibility for overseeing the risk management function at the Company on behalf of the Board. In carrying out its responsibilities, the AuditRisk Committee works closely with the Company’s Chief Risk Officer and other officers of the Company involved in risk management. The AuditRisk Committee meets at least quarterly with executive management and the Chief Risk Officer, the internal auditor and the independent registered public accounting firm and receives a comprehensive reportreports and dashboards on enterprise risk management, including management’s assessment of risk exposures (including risks related to liquidity, credit, operations and regulatory compliance, among others), and the processes in place to monitor and control such exposures. The AuditChief Risk Officer performs a risk assessment of each of the Bank’s products, services, operations and regulatory requirements to determine the overall risk to the Bank, and reports his findings to the Risk Committee. The Risk Committee also receivesmay receive updates between meetings, as may be necessary, from the Chief Risk Officer, the Chief Executive Officer, the President, the Chief Financial Officer and other members of management relating to risk oversight matters. The AuditRisk Committee provides a report

4

to the full Board on at least a quarterly basis. In addition, each quarter, the Audit Committee will discuss with management and the independent registered public accountant their review of the Company’s financial statements and significant findings based upon the independent registered public accounting firm’s review. The Company’s Chiefreview, and any material issues are relayed to the Risk Officer performs a risk-based assessment of each ofCommittee. On an annual basis, the Bank’s products, services, operations and regulatory requirements to determine the overall riskCompliance Officer provides a report to the Board regarding the Bank’s compliance with existing regulations, as well as future regulations that impact the Bank. The Chief Risk Officer’s compliance report, including the latest risk-based assessment, is providedAlso, at least annually to the Board. In addition, the Human Resources/Compensation Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) reviews with the Chief Risk Officer the Company’s compensation plans for all employees, including the CEO and other NEOs, to ensure that these plans do not encourage taking unnecessary and excessive risks that would threaten the value of the Company.

4

Code of Ethics and Standards of Personal Conduct

The Company and Bank have adopted a Code of Ethics and Standards of Personal Conduct that is designed to ensure that all directors, executive officers and employees of the Company and Bank, meet the highest standards of ethical conduct. The Code of Ethics and Standards of Personal Conduct requires that all directors, executive officers and employees avoid conflicts of interest, protect confidential information and customer privacy, comply with all laws and other legal requirements, conduct business in an honest and ethical manner and otherwise act with integrity and in the Company’s best interest. Under the terms of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Personal Conduct, all directors, executive officers and employees are required to report any conduct that they believe in good faith to be an actual or apparent violation of the Code.

As a mechanism to encourage compliance with the Code of Ethics and Standards of Personal Conduct, the Company and Bank established procedures to receive, retain and treat complaints received regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters. These procedures ensure that individuals may submit concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters in a confidential and anonymous manner. The Code of Ethics and Standards of Personal Conduct also prohibits the Company from retaliating against any director, executive officer or employee who reports actual or apparent violations of the Code.

Meetings of the Board of Directors

The Board of Directors of the Company and the Bank conduct business through meetings and the activities of the Boards and their committees. Board members are encouraged to attend all Board and Committee meetings. Their attendance and performance are among the criteria considered for re-nomination to the Board of Directors. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011,2013, the Company’s Board of Directors held 11ten meetings. All of the Directors of the Company attended at least 75% of the Board meetings and the committee meetings held on which such Directors served during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. 2013.

Committees of the Board of Directors

The Board of Directors of the Company maintains an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, and a Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee, and a Risk Committee.

Committees of the Board of Directors

The following table identifies the standing committees and their members as of December 31, 2011.2013.

5

Audit Committee. The Board of Directors has a separately-designated standing Audit Committee for the Company and Bank established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). The Audit Committee acts under a written Charter adopted by the Board of Directors. The Charter is available on the Company’s website (www.oceanfirst.com). Each member of the Audit Committee is “independent” in accordance with the listing standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”). The Audit Committee meets periodically with the independent registered public accounting firm and management to review accounting, auditing, internal control structure and financial reporting matters. The Board has determined

5

that Joseph J. Burke, the Audit Committee Chairman, Angelo Catania and Donald E. McLaughlin are “audit committee financial experts” under the Rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”). The Audit Committee met five times in 2013. The report of the Audit Committee required by the Rules of the Commission is included in this proxy statement. See“Proposal 3 – 3–Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Report of Audit Committee.”

Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee. The Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee of the Company takes a leadership role in shaping governance policies and practices, including recommending to the Board of Directors the corporate governance guidelines applicable to the Company and monitoring compliance with these policies and guidelines. In addition, the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee is responsible for identifying individuals qualified to become Board members and recommending to the Board the director nominees for election at the next annual meetingAnnual Meeting of stockholders.Stockholders. The Committee also recommends to the Board director candidates for each committee for appointment by the Board. Each member of the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee is independent in accordance with Nasdaq listing standards. The chairman of the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee functions as Lead Director. The Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee met twice in 2013.

The Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee acts under a written Charter and the Corporate Governance Policy adopted by the Board of Directors. The Charter is available on the Company’s website (www.oceanfirst.com). The procedures of the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee required to be disclosed by the Commission rules are included in this proxy statement. See“Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee Procedures.”

Human Resources/Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee of the Company and the Bank meets to establish compensation for the executive officers and to review the Company’s incentive compensation program when necessary. The Compensation Committee acts under a written Charter adopted by the Board of Directors, which is available on the Company’s website (www.oceanfirst.com). The Compensation Committee reviews and reassesses the adequacy of its Charter on an annual basis.

The Compensation Committee is also responsible for establishing certain guidelines and limits for compensation and benefit programs for other salaried officers and employees of the Company and the Bank. Each member of the Compensation Committee is independent in accordance with the Nasdaq listing standards. The Human Resources/Compensation Committee met four times in 2013. The report of the Compensation Committee required by the Commission rules is included in this proxy statement. See “Executive Compensation – Compensation—Compensation Committee Report on Executive Compensation.”

Risk Committee. The Risk Committee of the Company and the Bank was created in January 2013 to assist the Board in enterprise risk management functions. The Risk Committee acts under a written Charter adopted by the Board of Directors. The Charter is available on the Company’s website (www.oceanfirst.com) and is reviewed on an annual basis by the Risk Committee. The Risk Committee met three times in 2013. See “Board Role in the Oversight of Risk/Risk Committee.”

STOCK OWNERSHIP

The following table provides information as of March 15, 201211, 2014 with respect to the persons known by the Company to be the beneficial owners of more than 5% of its outstanding stock. A person is considered to beneficially own any shares of common stock over which he or she has, directly or indirectly, sole or shared voting or investment power.

6

The following table provides information as of March 15, 2012,11, 2014, about the shares of the Company common stock that may be considered to be beneficially owned by each director, nominee for director and the senior executive officers listed in the table under “Executive Compensation –- Summary Compensation Table,” and by all such directors and executive officers of the Company as a group. A person may be considered to beneficially own any shares of common stock over which he or she has, directly or indirectly, sole or shared voting or investment power. Unless otherwise indicated, each of the named individuals has sole voting power and sole investment power with respect to the shares shown.

7

8

None of the above directors or executive officers have pledged any shares of the Company.

PROPOSAL 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Company’s Board of Directors currently consists of eightnine directors. All of the directors are independent under current Nasdaq listing standards, except for John R. Garbarino, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and the Bank, and Christopher D. Maher, President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company and the Bank. The Board is divided into three classes with three-year staggered terms, with approximately one-third of the directors elected each year. Each of the members of the Board also serves as a director of the Bank. The Board of Directors’ nominees for election this year, to serve for a three year term and until their respective successors have been elected and qualified, are Ms. Diane F. RhineMessrs. Joseph J. Burke, Angelo Catania, and John R. Garbarino. Each of Messrs. John W. ChadwickBurke, Catania and Mark G. Solow, each of whomGarbarino is currently a director of the Company and the Bank. The experience and qualifications of each director are set forth under “Nominees for Election of Director.”

It is intended that the proxies solicited by the Board of Directors will be voted for the election of the nominees named above. If any nominee is unable to serve, the persons named in the proxy card will vote your shares and approve the election of any substitute proposed by the Board of Directors. Alternatively, the Board of Directors may adopt a resolution to reduce the size of the Board. At this time, the Board of Directors knows of no reason why any nominee might be unable to serve.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” the election of Ms. Diane F. RhineMessrs. Joseph J. Burke, Angelo Catania, and Messrs. John W. Chadwick and Mark G. Solow.R. Garbarino.

Information With Respect to Nominees, Continuing Directors and Certain Executive Officers

Information regarding the Board of Directors’ nominees for election at the Annual Meeting, as well as information regarding the continuing directors and the senior executive officers listed in the table under “Executive Compensation – Summary Compensation Table,” who are not directors isincluding those provided below. Unless otherwise stated, each individual has held his or her current position for the last five years. The age indicated for each individual is as of December 31, 2011.2013. The indicated period of service as a director includes service as a director of OceanFirst Bank.

Nominees for Election of Director

The biographiesbiography of each of the nominees and continuing directors below contains information regarding the person’s service as a director, business experience, director positions held currently or at any time during the last five years, information regarding involvement in certain legal or administrative proceedings, if applicable, and the experiences, qualifications, attributes or skills that caused the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee and the Board to determine that the person should serve as a director for the Company. The Board of Directors has determined that the Board as a whole must have the right diversity and mix of characteristics and skills for the optimal functioning of the Board in its oversight of the Company. The Company considers the following requirements for each of its members of the Board:

1)Personal characteristics: Integrity and accountability; informed judgment; financial literacy; mature confidence; and high performance standards.

9

2)Core competencies: Accounting and finance; business judgment; management; crisis response; industry knowledge; regional markets; leadership; and strategy/vision.

3)Director commitment: Time and effort; awareness and ongoing education; board attendance; other board commitments; stock ownership; changes in professional responsibilities; and length of service.

9

4)Team and company considerations: Balancing director contributions; diversity of skills; and Company financial condition.

The following directors have been nominated by the Corporate Governance/Nominating Committee for election to the Board with terms to expire in 2015:2017:

John W. Chadwick retired as the General Manager of Point Bay Fuel, a petroleum products distributor in late 2006. In his capacity as General Manager, Mr. Chadwick was responsible for the oversight of all aspects of the company’s operation, including its sixty-nine full-time employees which serviced approximately 15,000 accounts. Mr. Chadwick was responsible for all environmental issues, permits, advertising, insurance issues, public relations, consumer credit situations, contracting and buying of petroleum products and personnel decisions. Mr. Chadwick’s experience brings to the Board significant expertise in management, consumer affairs and leadership. Point Bay Fuel is not an affiliate of the Company. Mr. Chadwick has been a member of the Board of Directors since 2002. He is 70 years of age.

Diane F. Rhine has owned and operated her own real estate company since 1979. From October 2000 through November 2009, Ms. Rhine was a partner in Citta Rhine LLC. As of November 16, 2009, Ms. Rhine is President and sole owner of Citta & Cobb Inc. DBA as Rhine & Associates Inc. Ms. Rhine’s more than 30 years’ experience in residential real estate brokerage in Ocean County, New Jersey, brings to the Board management expertise and an extensive knowledge of the local real estate markets in which the Company conducts its business. Rhine & Associates Inc. is not an affiliate of the Company. Ms. Rhine has served on the Board of Directors since 1997. She is 62 years of age.

Mark G. Solow is a senior advisor to Crystal Ridge Partners, LLC and York Street Capital, firms which make equity investments in public and private companies. Mr. Solow served on the board of directors of Central Jersey Bank, N.A. and its holding company from their inceptions through 2010. Prior to his retirement in 2005, Mr. Solow was a co-founder and a Managing Partner of GarMark Advisors, LLC, the manager of private investment funds that invest in middle market companies. Prior to the formation of GarMark Advisors, LLC in 1997, Mr. Solow was a Senior Executive Vice President at Chemical Banking Corporation (a predecessor institution to JPMorgan Chase) and a member of its twelve-person management committee. During his career at Chemical Banking Corporation, he served in several capacities, including head of global investment banking, and corporate and multinational banking in North America, Western Europe and Asia. In addition, he was Senior Credit Officer for the United States, Canada, Western Europe and Asia. Mr. Solow brings to the Board broad experience with capital markets, investment banking, management and leadership, as well as detailed knowledge of commercial and community banking. Mr. Solow has served on the Board of Directors since November 14, 2011. Mr. Solow is 63 years of age.

Directors Continuing in Office

The following directors have terms ending in 2013:

Donald E. McLaughlin is a retired CPA. Prior to his retirement in 2005, from Donald E. McLaughlin, CPA, P.C. Mr. McLaughlin was employed as a CPA for 35 years. As a CPA, Mr. McLaughlin worked on audits of corporations, both public and privately owned. Mr. McLaughlin has prepared financial statements and tax returns, analyzed financial statements and results of operations and advised clients on methods to better improve performance. He has also been employed as a controller at a company with annual sales of $40 million. Through his extensive experience as a CPA, Mr. McLaughlin provides significant expertise to the Board on public accounting and financial matters. Mr. McLaughlin has served on the Board of Directors since 1985. He is 64 years of age.

10

John E. Walsh is a licensed professional engineer and has been employed with T&M Associates as Regional Client Manager since 2010, and was made Vice President in 2011. T&M Associates is a privately owned engineering, planning and environmental consulting company. Before then, he was Executive Vice President and interim Chief Operating Officer at CMX Engineering, Inc., a privately owned engineering company. At CMX, Mr. Walsh was responsible for all operational aspects of the business, including operational profitability and oversight of 380 professional engineers and technical staff. Mr. Walsh’s experience with T&M and CMX provides the Board with management and leadership skills, as well as extensive knowledge of business and marketing plans, annual budgets, personnel/resource management, sales initiatives, financial reporting and client management. Prior to joining CMX Engineering, he was President of Bay Pointe Engineering Associates, Inc. None of T&M Associates, CMX Engineering or Bay Pointe Engineering Associates, Inc. is an affiliate of the Company. Mr. Walsh has served on the Board of Directors since 2000. He is 58 years of age.

The following directors have terms ending in 2014:

Joseph J. Burke is a retired Certified Public Accountant (“CPA”) with over 30 years of experience specializing in the audits of banking institutions. He is a retired audit partner with KPMG LLP. This experience brings to the Board significant expertise in financial, accounting and auditing matters. KPMG LLP is not an affiliate of the Company. Mr. Burke has been a member of the Board since 2005. He is 6566 years of age.

Angelo Catania is the Chief Executive Officer and Managing Member of HomeStar Services LLC, an air conditioning, heating, plumbing and electrical service company, where he has been employed since February 2005. Prior to that time, he was President and Chief Operating Officer of Petro, Inc., one of the largest home heating oil and services companies in the United States. As President and COO of Petro, Mr. Catania was responsible for the oversight of approximately 2,800 employees that serviced over 535,000 residential and commercial accounts. Mr. Catania has also served as the corporate controller of a publicly-owned home heating oil delivery and service company, where he was responsible for accounting systems, bank relations, benefits, information technology and acquisitions. Mr. Catania’s experience as a senior officer of a large corporation brings to the Board significant management expertise and leadership skills, particularly as they relate to the use of technology to improve efficiency and customer service. Neither HomeStar Services LLC nor Petro, Inc. is an affiliate of the Company. He has been a member of the Board since 2006. He is 6264 years of age.

John R. Garbarino has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since 1995, and was President from 1995 to 2010. He has served in various capacities for the Bank since 1971, and has been a member of the Bank’s senior management since 1979. In 1985 he was elected President and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank, serving as President until 2010. In addition, he served as President of the Company and the Bank on an interim basis from September 2012 to March 25, 2013, when Mr. Maher joined the Company and the Bank. He has been a member of the Bank’s Board of Directors since 1984, and was appointed Chairman of the Board in 1989. Mr. Garbarino brings extensive experience in banking and executive management to the Board. Mr. Garbarino’s experience and vision has resulted in OceanFirst Bank becoming the largest and oldest community-based financial institution headquartered in Ocean County, New Jersey. His past involvement in leadership positions with the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York, the New Jersey Savings League, America’s Community Bankers, as well as numerous other community and business organizations during his 40 year career in banking provide insight to the Board on the factors that impact both the Company and its communities. Moreover, Mr. Garbarino’s leadership and intimate knowledge of the Company’s business and operations provide the Board with Company-specific experience and expertise. He is 6264 years of age.

Directors Continuing in Office

The following directors have terms ending in 2015:

John W. Chadwick retired as the General Manager of Point Bay Fuel, a petroleum products distributor in late 2006. In his capacity as General Manager, Mr. Chadwick was responsible for the oversight of all aspects of the company’s operation, including its sixty-nine full-time employees which serviced approximately 15,000 accounts. Mr. Chadwick was responsible for all environmental issues, permits, advertising, insurance issues, public relations, consumer credit situations, contracting and buying of petroleum products and personnel decisions. Mr. Chadwick brings to the Board significant expertise in management, consumer affairs and leadership. Point Bay Fuel is not an affiliate of the Company. Mr. Chadwick has been a member of the Board of Directors since 2002. He is 72 years of age.

Diane F. Rhine has owned and operated her own real estate company since 1979. From October 2000 through November 2009, Ms. Rhine was a partner in Citta Rhine LLC. As of November 16, 2009, Ms. Rhine is President and sole owner of Citta & Cobb Inc. DBA as Rhine & Associates Inc. Ms. Rhine’s more than 30 years’ experience in residential real estate brokerage in Ocean County, New Jersey, brings to the Board management expertise and an extensive knowledge of the local real estate markets in which the Company conducts its business.

10

Rhine & Associates Inc. is not an affiliate of the Company. Ms. Rhine has served on the Board of Directors since 1997. She is 64 years of age.

Mark G. Solow is an advisor to Crystal Ridge Partners, LLC and Alston Capital Partners, firms which make equity investments in public and private companies. Mr. Solow is a director of Modern Bank, a privately held commercial bank in New York, and served on the board of directors of Central Jersey Bank, N.A. and its holding company from their inceptions through 2010. Prior to his retirement in 2005, Mr. Solow was a co-founder and a Managing Partner of GarMark Advisors, LLC, the manager of private investment funds that invest in middle market companies. Prior to the formation of GarMark Advisors, LLC in 1997, Mr. Solow was a Senior Executive Vice President at Chemical Banking Corporation (a predecessor institution to JPMorgan Chase) and a member of its twelve-person management committee. During his career at Chemical Banking Corporation, he served in several capacities, including head of global investment banking, and corporate and multinational banking in North America, Western Europe and Asia. In addition, he was Senior Credit Officer for the United States, Canada, Western Europe and Asia. Mr. Solow brings to the Board broad experience with capital markets, investment banking, management and leadership, as well as detailed knowledge of commercial and community banking. Mr. Solow has served on the Board of Directors since November 14, 2011. He is 65 years of age.

The following directors have terms ending in 2016:

Christopher D. Maher joined the Company and the Bank on March 25, 2013 as President and Chief Operating Officer and was appointed to the Board of Directors on February 19, 2014. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Maher served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Patriot National Bancorp and Patriot National Bank since 2010. Before then, he was employed by The Dime Savings Bank of Williamsburgh and its holding company, Dime Community Bancshares, Inc., since 2005, where he was in charge of retail banking and was appointed as Executive Vice President and Chief Retail Officer in 2009. He is 47 years of age.

Donald E. McLaughlin is a retired Certified Public Accountant (“CPA”). Prior to his retirement in 2005 from Donald E. McLaughlin, CPA, P.C., Mr. McLaughlin was employed as a CPA for 35 years. As a CPA, Mr. McLaughlin worked on audits of corporations, both public and privately owned. Mr. McLaughlin has prepared financial statements and tax returns, analyzed financial statements and results of operations and advised clients on methods to better improve performance. He has also been employed as a controller at a company with annual sales of $40 million. Through his extensive experience as a CPA, Mr. McLaughlin provides significant expertise to the Board on public accounting and financial matters. Mr. McLaughlin has served on the Board of Directors since 1985. He is 66 years of age.

John E. Walsh is a licensed professional engineer and has been employed with T&M Associates as Regional Client Manager since 2010, and was appointed Vice President in 2011. T&M Associates is a privately owned engineering, planning and environmental consulting company. Before then, he served in various management capacities with CMX Engineering, Inc., a privately owned engineering company, from 2001 to 2010. At CMX, Mr. Walsh was responsible for all operational aspects of the business, including operational profitability and oversight of 380 professional engineers and technical staff. Mr. Walsh’s experience with T&M and CMX provides the Board with management and leadership skills, as well as extensive knowledge of business and marketing plans, annual budgets, personnel/resource management, sales initiatives, financial reporting and client management. Prior to joining CMX Engineering, he was President of Bay Pointe Engineering Associates, Inc., from 1987 to 2001. None of T&M Associates, CMX Engineering or Bay Pointe Engineering Associates, Inc. is an affiliate of the Company. Mr. Walsh has served on the Board of Directors since 2000. He is 60 years of age.

No director of the Company is also currently a director of a company having a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act or subject to the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act or any company registered as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

Senior Executive Officers Who Are Not Also Directors

Vito R. Nardelli has been President of the Company and the Bank since 2010 and Chief Operating Officer of the Bank since September 2005. He has been employed with the Bank since June 1, 2004. Mr. Nardelli has been employed in the banking industry for over 30 years. He most recently served as Director of Retail Banking for The Trust Company of New Jersey and, until 2003, as Division President of the Dime Savings Bank of New Jersey. He held various executive level positions at Marine Midland Bank and Wachovia (formerly First Union). Between 1991 and 1994, Mr. Nardelli served as Executive Director of the New Jersey Economic Development Authority. Mr. Nardelli began his banking career with Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. as Vice President and Department Head – Letter of Credit Division. His broad experience has ranged in the areas of investment banking, international products/global collections and corporate and municipal finance. He is 62 years of age.

11

Michael J. Fitzpatrick has been Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company since 1995. He has also been Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Bank since joining the Bank in 1992. He is 5658 years of age.

11

Joseph R. Iantosca has been Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer of the Bank since May 2013. Before then, he was First Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer of the Bank since May 2007 and Senior Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer since February 2004, when he joined the Bank. Before then, he was employed with BISYS Banking Solutions for seven years, most recently as National Vice President, Conversions and Implementations. He is 53 years of age.

Joseph J. Lebel IIIhas been First SeniorExecutive Vice President and Chief Lending Officer of the Bank since May 2013. Before then, he was First Senior Vice President and Chief Lending Officer since May 2007. When he first joined the Bank in April 2006, he was Senior Vice President of the Bank, in charge of Commercial Lending. Before then, he was employed with Wachovia Bank N.A. for approximately 22 years, most recently as Senior Vice President. He is 4951 years of age.

Joseph R. IantoscaCraig C. Spengeman has been First SeniorExecutive Vice President Chief Administrative Officerand Director of Trust & Asset Management of the Bank since May 2007.January 2014. Before then,joining OceanFirst, he was SeniorPresident of PGB Trust and Investments, a division of the Peapack-Gladsone Bank (“PGB”), and Executive Vice President Chief Administrative Officerand a Director of PGB and its holding company, since 2002. Mr. Spengeman was with PGB for over 29 years and has over 36 years of experience in the Bank since February 2004, when he joined the Bank. Before then, he was employed with BISYS Banking Solutions for seven years, most recently as National Vice President, ConversionsTrust and Implementations.Investment industry. He is 5258 years of age.

Steven J. Tsimbinoshas been First Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of the Company and the Bank since September 2010. Prior to joining OceanFirst, he was General Counsel of Copper River Management, L.P., the investment manager to a family of hedge funds, since May 2006, and prior to that a partner with Lowenstein Sandler PC, where he practiced corporate and securities law. He is 4244 years of age.

PROPOSAL 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The Company’s executive compensation program is intended to attract, motivate, reward and retain the senior management talent required to achieve its corporate objectives and increase stockholder value. The Company believes that its compensation policies and procedures are competitive, are focused on pay-for-performance principles and are strongly aligned with the long-term interests of its stockholders. The Company also believes that the Company and its stockholders benefit from responsive corporate governance policies and constructive and consistent dialogue. The proposal described below, commonly known as a “Say on Pay” proposal, gives each stockholder the opportunity to endorse or not endorse the compensation for the NEOs by voting to approve or not approve such compensation as described in this proxy statement.

The Company’s stockholders are being asked to approve the compensation of the Company’s NEOs as described in this proxy statement, namely, under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and the included tabular and narrative disclosure.

The Board of Directors urges stockholders to endorse the compensation program for the Company’s executive officers by voting FOR Proposal 2. As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the Compensation Committee believes that the compensation of the named executive officers described herein is reasonable and appropriate, and is justified by the performance of the Company in an extremelya difficult operating environment.

In deciding how to vote on this proposal, the Board urges you to consider the following factors, manysome of which are more fully discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (which stockholders are encouraged to read):

This

12

12

Please note that your vote is advisory and will not be binding upon the Board, and may not be construed as overruling a decision by the Board or createcreating or implyimplying any additional fiduciary duty by the Board. The Compensation Committee may take into account the outcome of the vote when considering future executive compensation arrangements.

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote “FOR” the approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement, the accompanying compensation tables, and the related narrative disclosure.

PROPOSAL 3. RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT

OF THE INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20112013 was KPMG LLP. Acting on the recommendation of theThe Audit Committee the Board of Directors reappointed KPMG LLP to continue as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Company for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2012,2014, subject to ratification of such appointment by the stockholders. If stockholders do not ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, the Audit Committee may, but is not required to, consider other independent registered public accounting firms.

Representatives of KPMG LLP will be present at the Annual Meeting. They will be given an opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions from stockholders present at the Annual Meeting.

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote “FOR” Proposal 3, the ratification of the appointment of KPMG LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm of the Company.

Audit Fees

The following table sets forth the fees billed to the Company for the fiscal years ended December 31, 20112013 and December 31, 20102012 by KPMG LLP:

13

The Audit Committee believes that the provision of non-audit services by KPMG LLP is compatible with maintaining KPMG LLP’s independence.

Policy on Audit Committee Pre-Approval of Audit and Permissible Non-Audit Services of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Audit Committee is responsible for appointing, setting compensation and overseeing the work of the independent registered public accounting firm. In accordance with its Charter, the Audit Committee approves, in advance, all audit and permissible non-audit services to be performed by the independent registered public accounting firm. Such approval process ensures that the independent registered public accounting firm does not provide any non-audit services to the Company that are prohibited by law or regulation.

13

During the year ended December 31, 2011,2013, 100% of the audit related fees, tax related fees and other fees set forth above were approved by the Audit Committee.

Report of the Audit Committee

The Company’s management is responsible for the Company’s internal controls and financial reporting process. The Director of Internal Audit reports directly to the Audit Committee. The Director of Internal Audit submitted and implemented an internal audit plan for 2011.2013.

The independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for performing an independent audit of the Company’s financial statements and issuing an opinion on the conformity of these financial statements with generally accepted accounting principles. The Audit Committee oversees the Company’s internal controls and financial reporting process on behalf of the Board of Directors.

The Audit Committee reviewed and discussed the annual financial statements with management and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. As part of this process, management represented to the Audit Committee that the financial statements were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The Audit Committee also received and reviewed written disclosures and a letter from the independent registered public accounting firm regarding their independence as required under applicable standards for independent registered public accounting firms of public companies. The Audit Committee discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm the contents of such materials, their independence and additional matters required under Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, as amended (AICPA, Professional Standards, Vol. 1. AU Section 380), as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3200T, including the quality, not just the acceptability, of the accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments, and the clarity of the disclosures in the financial statements.

In addition, the Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from the independent registered public accounting firm required by the Independence Standards Board Standard No. 1 (Independence Discussions With Audit Committees), as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3600T, and has discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm, the independent registered public accounting firm’s independence from the Company and its management. In concluding that the independent registered public accounting firm was independent, the Audit Committee considered, among other factors, whether the non-audit services provided by the independent registered public accounting firm were compatible with the independent registered public accounting firm’s independence.

The Audit Committee discussed with the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm the overall scope and plans for their audit. The Audit Committee met with the independent registered public accounting firm, with and without management present, to discuss the results of their examination, their evaluation of the Company’s internal controls, and the overall quality of the Company’s financial reporting.

14

In performing all of these functions, the Audit Committee acts only in an oversight capacity. In its oversight role, the Audit Committee relies on the work and assurances of the Company’s management, which has the primary responsibility for financial statements and reports, and of the independent registered public accounting firm who, in their report, express an opinion on the conformity of the Company’s financial statements to generally accepted accounting principles. The Audit Committee’s oversight does not provide it with an independent basis to determine that management has maintained appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles or policies, or appropriate internal controls and procedures designed to assure compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations. Furthermore, the Audit Committee’s considerations and discussions with management and the independent registered public accounting firm do not assure that the Company’s financial statements are presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, that the audit of the Company’s financial statements has been carried out in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards or that the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm is in fact “independent.”

14

Based on such review and discussions, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited consolidated financial statements be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20112013 for filing with the Commission. The Audit Committee also has approved, subject to stockholder ratification, the selection of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm.

The Audit Committee

Joseph J. Burke, CPA, Retired, Chairman

Donald E. McLaughlin, CPA, Retired

Angelo Catania

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Overview

This section describes the objectives, design and rationale of the Company’s compensation program for its NEOs, and discusses each material element of the Company’s NEO compensation program, how compensation is determined, and recent developments in the Company’s compensation program.

Objectives

OceanFirst’s vision and mission is to produce value for its stockholders by providing outstanding service and responsiveness to the markets and customers it serves. To achieve that goal, the Company’s objectives for its executive officer compensation program are to:

15

How Compensation Is Determined

The Compensation Committee reviews compensation for the CEO, the other NEOs and the other officers subject to the reporting requirements of Section 16 under the Exchange Act (including the NEOs, the “Section 16 Officers”), as well as establishes certain guidelines and limits for compensation and benefits programs for other employees of the Company and the Bank. The Compensation Committee annually reviews and evaluates recommendations made by management regarding compensation, including base salary, bonuses and equity grants for the Section 16 Officers. The Compensation Committee then determines the compensation for the CEO and Section 16 Officers and reports its determination to the Board. In establishing compensation levels, the Compensation Committee considers the Company’s overall objectives and performance, reports of compensation consultants, peer group comparisons, market data for other institutions, individual executive performance, the relative level of compensation among executive officers and regulatory requirements. The Compensation Committee also meets withhas the Chief Risk Officer to review any potential and actual risks created by the Company’s compensation program, and to analyze the controls in place and risk mitigation mechanisms.

15

Executive management and outside advisors from time-to-time may be invited to Compensation Committee meetings to provide their views on compensation matters. The CEO participates in the process of determining compensation for the other Section 16 Officers by making recommendations regarding base salary adjustments, and awards under incentive and equity plans. The CEO does not participate in the Compensation Committee’s decision as to his own compensation package. See “Corporate Governance – Committees of the Board of Directors” for further information regarding the Compensation Committee.

Role of Compensation Consultant

The Compensation Committee retained Frederic W. CookMosteller & Co., Inc.Associates (“FWCMA”) in early 20112012 as its independent compensation consultant. FWC replaced Towers Watson, which had been the Committee’s advisor since 2008. The Compensation Committee considers advice and recommendations received from FWCMA in making compensation decisions. FWCMA is independent of the Bank’s management, reports directly to the Compensation Committee, and has no economic relationship with the Company other than its role as advisor to the Compensation Committee.

Compensation Study

For 2011, FWCMA conducted a study for the Compensation Committee for use in making compensation decisions for 2011 and beyond. FWC2013. MA reviewed the currentprior peer group for appropriateness and identifiedrecommended changes for 2011.2013. The Compensation Committee has historically relied on a peer group to assess relative performance for its annual incentive plans and makeuses this information as a factor when making compensation decisions. The study proposed removing one institutionreplacing two institutions from the peer group due to acquisition and identified anor a more appropriate peer institution that the Compensation Committee could add as a replacement.having been identified. The Compensation Committee approved that changethose changes at theirits March 20117, 2013 meeting. The 14 bank peer group established for the 20112013 study consisted of the following:

Alliance FinancialBryn Mawr Banc Corp. (NY)(PA) – NASDAQ: ALNC

Center Bancorp, Inc. (NJ) – NASDAQ: CNBCBMTC

Dime Community Bancshares (NJ) – NASDAQ: DCOM

First of Long Island CorpCorp. (NY) – NASDAQ: FLIC

Flushing Financial Corp. (NY) – NASDAQ: FFIC

Hudson Valley Holding Corp. (NY) – NASDAQ: HUVL

Kearny Financial Corp. (NJ) – NASDAQ: KRNY

Lakeland Bancorp, Inc. (NJ) – NASDAQ: LBAI

Oritani Financial Corp. (NJ) – NASDAQ: ORIT

Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corp. (NJ) – NASDAQ: PGC

Provident New York Bancorp (NY) – NASDAQ: PBNY

Rockville Financial Inc. (CT) – NASDAQ: RCKB

State Bancorp, Inc. (NY) – NASDAQ: STBC

Sterling Bancorp. (NY) – NASDAQ: STL

Suffolk Bancorp (NY) – NASDAQ: SUBK

Trustco Bank Corp (NY)Univest Corp. of Pennsylvania (PA) – NASDAQ: TRSTUVSP

FWCWSFS Financial Corp. – (Delaware) – NASDAQ: WSFS

16

MA conducted a review of the Bank’s current level of director and executive compensation relative to its peers and provided the Compensation Committee with its report at their June 2011its July 8, 2013 meeting. The executive compensation results found a strong alignment between performance and executive compensation at OceanFirst. OceanFirst was at or above the median of its peers on two of the five key metrics and at or above the 75^th percentile on the remaining three. The metricsfinancial performance indicators in the studyreview were total interest and other income growth, earnings per share growth,as follows: (1) asset size, where the Bank was $2.269 billion as compared to a peer group average of $2.839 billion, ranking the Bank ninth in the peer group; (2) return on assets, where the Bank ranked seventh in the peer group for 2012 performance and fifth in the peer group for three year average ROA, and (3) return on equity, where the Bank ranked fifth compared to the peer group average for 2012 and total shareholder return.third as compared to the peer group’s average for the three year period. Overall, the base salaries were nearin the median25^th to 50^th percentile when compared to the peer group while the target bonuses were at or abovetrended in the 75range of the 25^th percentile. On average, target total compensation was positioned betweenat the medianlower end of the mid-market level and lower than the 75^th percentile.comparative peer median. The 20112013 study was taken into account by the Compensation Committee to set and establish director and executive compensation and review director compensation for 2011.the remainder of 2013. The Board maintained all retainers at their existing levels but increased the fee for Bank Board meetings from $1,000 to $1,500 per meeting attended.See “Director Compensation Committee made no changes to the director retainers or fees– Cash and Stock Retainers and Meeting Fees for 2011.Non-Employee Directors.”

Consideration of Last Year’s Advisory Stockholder Votes on Executive Compensation

At the 20112013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, approximately 94%97% of the shares voting on the Company’s first non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation (commonly known as “say on pay”) were cast in favor of the compensation of the Company’s executive officers, as described in the 20112013 Proxy Statement. The Board and the

16

Compensation Committee appreciate and value the views of stockholders. In considering the results of this advisory vote on executive compensation, the Committee concluded that the compensation paid to executive officers and the Company’s overall pay practices enjoy strong stockholder support.

In making compensation decisions for the remainder of 20112013 and to date in 2012,2014, the Board and the Committee have considered, among other factors, this strong stockholder support and the Company’sBoard’s overall satisfaction with the current compensation mix and levels, and have not made significant changes to the mix or level of compensation. Going forward, future advisory votes on executive compensation will serve as an additional tool to guide the Board and the Committee in their assessment of the Company’s executive compensation program.

Also at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, the Company’s stockholders expressed a preference that advisory votes on executive compensation occur once every year. Consistent with this preference, the Board determined to implement an annual advisory vote on executive compensation.

Compensation Program Design and Rationale

Cash Compensation.Current cash compensation consists of base salary, and a performance-based cash bonusbonuses under a cash incentive plan. In addition to the performance-based compensation, the Company mayplan and from time to time maketime-to-time discretionary cash bonus payments to rectify inequities or recognize outstanding performance. No such discretionary bonuses were made to Section 16 Officers during fiscal 2011.bonuses.

Base Salary.The base salary levels for the Section 16 Officers are intended to be competitive with the practices of comparable financial institutions at appropriate levels to motivate individuals to discharge the responsibilities of their positions, while being mindful of managing costs. Messrs. Garbarino, NardelliMaher and Fitzpatrick have employment agreements with the Company and the Bank and receive base salaries under those agreements, subject to annual review.

Performance-Based Bonuses.A significant portion of each Section 16 officer’sOfficer’s annual cash compensation is contingent on the performance of the Company, the Bank and the individual under a cash incentive compensation plan. Under the incentive compensation plan, performance-based bonuses are paid, generally annually, based on the Company’s level of achievement of pre-established financial performance objectives, as well as individual performance. This mechanism allows the Company to target and reward individual behaviors that promote the Company’s performance in a way that is consistent with its strategic plan and encourages prudent decision-making, effective risk management and safe and sound practices.

Discretionary Bonus Payments. In addition to the performance-based bonuses, the Company may from time to time make discretionary cash bonus payments to rectify inequities or recognize outstanding performance.

Equity Compensation Plan.During 2011, the The Company grantedgrants stock options andand/or restricted stock awards to attract, retain and motivate non-employee directors and employees by providing for or increasing their economic interests in the success of the Company. Equity grants under the Stock PlansCompany’s stock incentive plans complement total compensation packages as well as enable the Company to align director and executive management interests aswith those of the stockholders of the Company.

17

Mix of Compensation Elements; Risk Mitigation. The Committee believes that it maintains the appropriate balance of base salary and incentive compensation elements to motivate executives and reward accomplishments. Performance-based incentive bonus awards play an important role in the executive compensation program, but their use is balanced to provide stability and to avoid encouraging strategies and risk-taking that might not align with the long term best interests of the Company and its stockholders and safe and sound banking practices, as further described below. The Company utilizes performance-based bonuses with bonus targets ranging from 25% to 50% of base salary for its Section 16 Officers.

The Company is mindful of regulatory sound compensation practices that are designed to cause banking institutions to structure compensation programs in a way that does not provide incentives for executives to take imprudent or excessive risks. The Company’s compensation program for Section 16 Officers is designed to mitigate risk by (1) providing non-performance-based salaries, retirement and fringe benefits that are competitive in the market, permit executives to pay living expenses and provide stability without reliance on incentives; (2) incorporating cash incentives to reward performance in accordance with predefined goals and objectives; (3) including long-term incentives in the form of restricted stock awards andand/or stock options to maintain focus on long-term shareholder value; and (4) considering prior period results, the exposure to risk, and actual risk outcomes in determining current and future compensation. To further mitigate risk resulting from performance-based compensation, the Committee considers, and uses when appropriate, metrics and performance goals that incorporate risk management, “clawbacks” to recover payments, and performance periods longer than one year. The use of

17

equity-based long term compensation, in combination with executive stock ownership requirements, reflects the Company’s compensation program’s goals of aligning the interests of executives and stockholders, thereby reducing the exposure to imprudent or excessive risk taking. The Company believes these features recognize a balance between the need to accept risk exposure in the successful operation of its business and the need to identify and prudently manage such risks.

Elements of Compensation

Overview.Overview. To achieve the Company’s objectives for its NEO compensation program, the program includes the following elements: (1) base salary; (2) a performance-based annual cash bonus under a cash incentive compensation plan; (3) awards of stock options and restricted shares of Company common stock under the equity compensation plans; (4) welfare benefits under the group benefit programs; (5) retirement benefits under the ESOP and 401(k) Plan and supplemental retirement benefits for selectcertain NEOs under the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”); (6) Company-paid automobile benefit and perquisites for selectedcertain NEOs; (7) eligibility for payments and benefits in the event of certain employment terminations and/or in the event of a change in control of the Company; and (8) nonqualified deferred compensation under the Deferred Compensation Plan for Executives. The following describes the elements of compensation and provides information on certain decisions regarding 20112013 compensation.

Base Salary.After the Compensation Committee’s consideration of various factors, including prevailing market conditions, current and anticipated Company performance, the performance and responsibilities of individual executives, current pay levels and the FWCMA report, the Company:

Cash Incentive Awards.The Company determined cash incentive awards for 2011 in accordance with guidelines established by the Compensation Committee. Annual non-discretionary cash bonuses for the Section 16 Officers are determined under the annual incentive plan and contingent on the performance of the Company, the Bank and the individual, by comparing actual Company performance against targets that are approved by the Compensation Committee at the

18

beginning of 2011.2013. The targets are weighted between individual objectives and the Company’s success in achieving its financial goals. Targeted bonus levels for NEOs in 20112013 ranged from 25% to 50% of base salary. Generally, the higher the level of responsibility of the officer or employee in the Company, the greater the percentage of base salary that may be awarded as a cash bonus under the plan for achievement of performance goals. Ordinarily, if cash incentive compensation is paid out under the plan, actual bonus payments may range from 50% of targeted bonus levels for threshold performance to 150% for superior performance.

For 2011,2013, incentive payments were based on earnings per share,net income and efficiency ratio and total shareholder return, utilizing the following matrix:

18

For purposes of the matrix, Earnings Per Share (EPS)Net Income and Efficiency Ratio are the amounts set forth inwere derived from the Company’s financial statements,2013 Business Plan as adjusted for certain non-recurring items that areproposed by senior management and approved by the Board in late 2012. For 2013, two strategic initiatives were developed by management, approved by the Board and executed by management to improve the future earnings stream of Directors. Total Shareholder Return Against Peers (TSR) is basedthe Bank. The two initiatives were (1) prepayment of costly longer-term FHLB advances incurring a prepayment fee, and (2) consolidation of two branches into newer, in-market facilities, resulting in a non-recurring charge. As the result of implementing these two strategic initiatives in the second half of 2013, the full year performance for both performance measures were adversely impacted by non-recurring expenses. The net result was Net Income for 2013 at $16.3 million and the Efficiency Ratio for 2013 at 68.3%, both of which did not meet the Threshold level. As a result, the Section 16 Officers were not paid cash incentives under the guidelines established at the beginning of 2013 for cash incentive awards.

Discretionary Bonus Payments. In order to recognize management’s efforts in leading the Company to a profitable year despite the impact of the above initiatives, and to avoid an unfair result on the Company’s stockperformance assessment and dividendrelated bonus opportunity for the Section 16 Officers, the Compensation Committee approved discretionary bonuses for the Section 16 Officers. The Compensation Committee assessed the full year’s performance measured against the group of fifteen similar financial institutions utilized by FWC in its study. See “Compensation Study.” The Company must attain net income of at least $2,122,000 and meet the threshold level in at least one category in order to pay any bonus based on the Company’s performance. For 2011, the Company’s EPS was $1.14, Efficiency Ratio was 56.86%, and TSR was 75^th Percentile. Based on the weighting of the various Metrics set forth above,a strategic basis, taking into account the Bank’s performance funded at 113.8%and the success of Target. Actual payouts were subject to adjustmentsenior management, and the Section 16 Officers in particular, in developing and executing forward-looking initiatives without regard for the negative impact of those actions on their 2013 cash incentive opportunities, as well as the performance of each NEO’s performance. Cash incentive awardsSection 16 Officer. Amounts paid to the NEOs on this basis for 20112013 are presented under the “Non-Equity Incentive Compensation Plan”“Bonus” column in the Summary Compensation Table below.

Equity Incentive Awards.The Board, at the recommendation of the Compensation Committee, approved the grantgrants of stock options and restricted stock awards under the Company’s stock incentive plans. The award levels and vesting scheduleschedules were determined based on various factors, including prevailing market conditions, performance and responsibilities of individual executives, current pay levels, the amount of awards previously granted and the FWCMA report. Awards in 20112013 to the NEOs are presented under the “Stock Award”“Stock Award” column of the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table.

Benefits.All NEOs participate in the benefit plans generally available to the employees, including medical, life and disability insurance, the 401(k) Plan and the ESOP. The Company also maintains SERPs covering Messrs. Garbarino, NardelliMaher and Fitzpatrick. These SERPs are intended to promote continued service of covered executives by providing a supplement to the executive’s other qualified retirement plan benefits, which are limited by law. TheIn the case of Messrs. Garbarino and Fitzpatrick, the benefit is based on the average of the highest compensation during any four consecutive calendar years and length of service with the Company.Company, and in the case of Mr. Maher, an agreed upon schedule of contributions. In 2010, Mr. Garbarino agreed to make a portion of his SERP payment contingent upon the attainment of certain Company performance targets. These amounts would beare paid under thatthe 2011 Cash Incentive Compensation Plan to maximize their tax deductibility. See “Executive Compensation–Nonqualified Deferred Compensation – Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.”

19

Perquisites.The Company provided perquisites to selectedcertain NEOs in the form of Company-paid automobile benefits and golf club dues. The NEOs are subject to the Company’s Travel and Entertainment Policy, which governs travel, dining and entertainment expenses for all employees.

Deferred Compensation.The Bank provides thecertain NEOs with an opportunity to elect to defer current compensation under the Deferred Compensation Plan for Executives (the “Deferral Plan”). The Deferral Plan permits eligible executives selected by the Bank’s Board to elect to defer receipt of up to 100% of base salary and annual bonus pursuant to the terms of the Deferral Plan.

Employment Agreements.Each of the Bank and the Company have entered into separate employment agreements with Messrs. Garbarino, NardelliMaher and Fitzpatrick (individually, the “Executive”). The employment agreements are intended to ensure that the Bank and the Company will be able to maintain a stable and competent management base. The continued success of the Bank and the Company depends to a significant degree on the skills and competence of Messrs. Garbarino, NardelliMaher and Fitzpatrick.

TheMessrs. Garbarino, Maher and Fitzpatrick have employment agreements provide for a three-year term for each Executive. The Bankwith terms expiring December 31, 2014, December 31, 2014 and July 31, 2016, respectively. Each employment agreement provides that the BoardBoards of the Company and the Bank, annually, may extend the agreement for an additional year so that the remaining term shall be three years,period, unless written notice of non-renewal is given by the Board of the Bank after conducting a performance evaluation of the Executive. In 2011, the Company and each executive amended the respective Company employment agreement to change from daily extensions to annual renewals so that the Bank’s and the Company’s employment agreements follow the same renewal procedure. In addition to the base salary, the agreements provide for, among other things, participation in stock benefit plans and other fringe benefits applicable to executive personnel.

The agreements provide for termination, at any time, by the Bank or the Company for cause as defined in the agreements. In the event the Bank or the Company chooses to terminate the Executive’s employment for reasons other than for cause, or in the event of the Executive’s resignation from the Bank and the Company upon: (1) failure to re-elect the Executive to his current offices; (2) a material change in the Executive’s functions, duties or responsibilities; (3) material change in the Executive’s principal place of employment; (4) material reduction in the

19

Executive’s salary; or (5) a material breach of the agreement by the Bank or the Company, the Executive, or in the event of Executive’s subsequent death, his beneficiary, beneficiaries or estate, as the case may be, would be entitled to receive an amount equal to the remaining base salary payments due to the Executive and the contributions that would have been made on the Executive’s behalf to any employee benefit plans of the Bank or the Company during the remaining term of the agreement. Theagreement, or in Mr. Maher’s case, if greater, one year’s base salary at the time of termination. Mr. Maher is also entitled to such amount if he resigns because the Company and the Bank have not by July 31, 2014 extended the term of his employment agreements beyond July 31, 2015. In the event of such a qualifying termination, the Bank and the Company would also continue to pay for the Executive’s life, health and disability coverage for the remaining term of the employment agreement.agreement, or in Mr. Maher’s case, for one year if the remaining term is less than one year.

Under the agreements, if voluntarya qualifying resignation or involuntary termination (other than for cause) follows a change in control (as defined in the employment agreements) of the Bank or the Company, (as defined in the employment agreement), the Executive or, in the event of the Executive’s death, his beneficiary, would be entitled to a severance payment equal to the greater of: (1) the payments due for the remaining term of the agreement; or (2) three times the average of the five preceding taxable years’ compensation.compensation (or lesser number of years if the Executive has been with the Company for less than five years). Such average compensation includes not only base salary, but also commissions, bonuses, contributions on behalf of the Executive to any pension or profit sharing plan, insurance payments, directors’ or committee fees and fringe benefits paid or to be paid to the Executive during the preceding five taxable years. However, any payments to the Executive under the Bank’s employment agreement would be subtracted from any amount due simultaneously under the Company’s employment agreement. The Bank and the Company would also continue the Executive’s life, health, and disability coverage for thirty-six36 months. However, if the amount of such termination benefits are deemed to be parachute payments as defined in section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), such termination benefits will be reduced to an amount $1.00 less than the amount that triggers such excise tax, but only if such reduced amount is greater than the aggregate amount of the termination benefits unreduced less the amount of the excise tax and any applicable state and federal taxes. Although both the Company and the Bank agreements provide for a severance payment in the event of a termination by the Company or the Bank, or in the event of a termination following a change in control, the Executive would only be entitled to receive a severance payment under one agreement.

20

Payments to the Executive under the Bank’s agreement will be guaranteed by the Company in the event that payments or benefits are not paid by the Bank. Payment under the Company’s agreement would be made by the Company. All reasonable costs and legal fees paid or incurred by the Executive pursuant to any dispute or question of interpretation relating to the agreements shall be paid by the Bank or Company, respectively, if the Executive is successful on the merits pursuant to a legal judgment, arbitration or settlement. The employment agreements also provide that the Bank and Company shall indemnify the Executive to the fullest extent allowable under federal and Delaware law, respectively.

Change in Control Agreements.For similar reasons as with the employment agreements, the Bank and the Company entered into change in control agreements (“CIC Agreements”) with Messrs. Lebel and Iantosca (individually, the “Executive”). Each CIC Agreement provides for a two-year term. The Bank CIC Agreement providesAgreements provide that the BoardBoards of the Company and the Bank may, annually, extend the CIC AgreementAgreements for an additional year so that the remaining term shall be two years,period unless written notice of non-renewal is given by the Board of the Bank after conducting a performance evaluation of the Executive. In 2011, the Company and each executive amended the respective CompanyEach Executive’s CIC Agreement to change from daily extensions to annual renewals so that the Bank’s and the Company’s CIC Agreements follow the same renewal procedure.will expire on July 31, 2015. The CIC Agreements provide that in the event voluntary or involuntary termination follows a change in control (as defined in the agreements) of the Bank or the Company, (as defined in the agreement), the Executive would be entitled to a severance payment equal to two (2) times the Executive’s average annual compensation for the five years preceding termination.termination (or lesser number of years if the Executive has been with the Company for less than five years). Annual compensation includes Base Salary, commissions, bonuses, contributions on behalf of the Executive to any pension and profit sharing plan, severance payments and fringe benefits paid or to be paid the Executive during such years. Additionally, in the event the Executive has been employed less than five years at the time of termination in connection with a change in control, the Executive’s annual compensation shall be annualized for any partial taxable year of employment or service as if the Executive was employed or served for the full taxable year. However, any payments to the Executive under the Bank’s CIC Agreement would be subtracted from any amount due simultaneously under the Company’s CIC Agreement. The Company and the Bank would also continue and pay for the Executive’s life, health and disability coverage for thirty-six (36)36 full calendar months following termination. However, if the amount of such termination benefits are deemed to be parachute payments as defined in section 280G of the Code, such termination benefits will be reduced to an amount $1.00 less than the amount that triggers such excise tax, but only if such reduced amount is greater than the aggregate amount of the termination benefits unreduced less the amount of the excise tax and any applicable state and federal taxes.

Payments to the Executive under the Bank’s CIC Agreement are guaranteed by the Company in the event that payments or benefits are not paid by the Bank.

Payments under the employment agreements and CIC agreements in the event of a change in control may constitute some portion of an excess parachute payment under section 280G of the Code for executive officers, resulting in the imposition of an excise tax on the recipient and denial of the deduction for such excess amounts to the Company and the Bank.

20

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth certain summary information regarding the compensation paid or accrued by the Company during the fiscal year ended December 31, 20112013 to or for the account of the CEO, Chief Financial Officer, and the other three (3) most highly compensated executive officers of the Company:

21

21

22

For a description of the employment agreements entered into with Messrs. Garbarino, Maher and Fitzpatrick, see“Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Elements of Compensation – Employment Agreements.”

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table sets forth certain information regarding stock options, restricted stock awards and non-equity incentive plan awards to the executive officers of the CompanyNEOs during the Company’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.2013.

22

23

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

The following table sets forth certain information regarding stock optionoptions and stock awards toheld by the named executive officers of the Company during the Company’s fiscal year endedat December 31, 2011:2013:

(Table continues and footnotes on following pages)

2324