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.     )

 

 

Filed by the Registrant 

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant 

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

Check the appropriate box:

¨

Preliminary Proxy Statement

¨

Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

x

Definitive Proxy Statement

¨

Definitive Additional Materials

¨

Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12

Corrections Corporation of AmericaCoreCivic, Inc.

(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):

¨

No fee required.

¨

Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

(1)

Title of each Class of securities to which transaction applies:

 

 

(2)

Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

 

 

(3)

Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

 

 

(4)

Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

 

 

(5)

Total fee paid:

 

¨

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

¨

Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

(1)

Amount Previously Paid:

 

 

(2)

Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

 

 

(3)

Filing Party:

 

 

(4)

Date Filed:

 

 

 


LOGO

March 30, 2016April 4, 2019

To our Stockholders:

You are invited to attend the 20162019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Corrections Corporation of AmericaCoreCivic, Inc. (the “Company”) to be held at 10:00 a.m., local time, on Thursday, May 12, 2016,16, 2019, at the Company’s corporate headquarters, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee. The Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement, both of which accompany this letter, provide details regarding the business to be conducted at the meeting, as well as other important information about the Company.

Following the formal matters to be addressed at the meeting, stockholders will have the opportunity to ask questions about the Company.

If you wish to attend the meeting, you will need to request an admission ticket in advance. Instructions on how you can request an admission ticket are on page 2 of the Proxy Statement.

Along with the other members of the Board of Directors and management, we look forward to greeting you at the Annual Meeting if you are able to attend.

Sincerely,

 

Sincerely,

LOGO

John D. Ferguson

Mark A. Emkes

Chairman of the Board of Directors

LOGO

Damon T. Hininger

President and Chief Executive Officer


CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICACORECIVIC, INC.

10 Burton Hills Boulevard

Nashville, Tennessee 37215

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 12, 201616, 2019

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of CoreCivic, Inc. (the “Annual Meeting”) will be held at 10:00 a.m., local time, on Thursday, May 12, 2016,16, 2019, at our corporate headquarters, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee. At the Annual Meeting, stockholders will consider and act on the following items of business:

 

(1)

The election of the 911 nominees named in the accompanying Proxy Statement to serve on our Board of Directors. The nominees are Damon T. Hininger, Donna M. Alvarado, Robert J. Dennis, C. Michael Jacobi,Mark A. Emkes, Stacia A. Hylton, Harley G. Lappin, Anne L. Mariucci, Mark A. Emkes, Thurgood Marshall, Jr., Devin I. Murphy, Charles L. Overby and John R. Prann, Jr.

 

(2)

The non‑binding ratification of the appointment by our Audit Committee of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

 

(3)

An advisory vote to approve the compensation of our named executive officers.Named Executive Officers.

 

(4)

Such other matters as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof.

We are pleased to take advantage of Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rules that allow issuers to furnish proxy materials to their stockholders over the internet. We believe these rules allow us to provide our stockholders with the information they need in a timely and convenient manner, while lowering the costs of delivery and reducing the environmental impact of our annual meeting.the Annual Meeting. Our Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Stockholders (including our Letter to Stockholders and 20152018 Annual Report on Form 10-K) are available on our website at www.cca.com.www.corecivic.com. Additionally, and in accordance with SEC rules, you may access our proxy materials athttp://materials.proxyvote.com/22025Y21871N. You canmay request copies of the proxy materials, including our Proxy Statement, without charge by sending a written request to CCA,CoreCivic, Attention: Cameron Hopewell, Managing Director of Investor Relations, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, or by calling Cameron Hopewell at (615) 263-3000.

Your vote is important. You may vote by internet or toll-free telephone. If you receive a copy of theour Proxy Statement and proxy statement and card by mail, you may vote by completing, signing and returning the proxy card in the accompanying postage-paid envelope. Please refer to the proxy card and the accompanying Proxy Statement for additional information regarding your voting options. Even if you plan to attend the Annual Meeting, please take advantage of one of the advance voting options to ensure that your shares are represented at the Annual Meeting. You may revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted by following the procedures described in the accompanying Proxy Statement.

Stockholders of record at the close of business on March 14, 201618, 2019 are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting and any adjournments or postponements thereof.

 

By Order of the Board of Directors,

LOGO

/s/ Cole G. Carter

Steven E. Groom

Cole G. Carter

Executive

Senior Vice President, General Counsel and& Secretary

March 30, 201629, 2019

Nashville, Tennessee


TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Page

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE STOCKHOLDER MEETING TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 12, 201616, 2019

1

INFORMATION ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING AND VOTING

2

What matters will be acted on at the Annual Meeting?

2

Who is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting?

2

What do I need to attend the Annual Meeting?

2

What areHow does our Board recommend I vote on each of the Board of Directors’ recommendations?proposals?

2

Why did I receive athe Notice in the mail instead of a full set of printed proxy materials?

2

3

How do I vote?

3

What are broker non-votes?

3

What vote is required to approve each proposal?

3

4

Where can I find the Annual Meeting voting results?

4

5

How and when may I submit a stockholder proposal for the Company’s 20172020 Annual Meeting?

4

5

How can I obtain the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K?

4

5

What are the costs of soliciting these proxies?

4

5

How many copies of the Notice and proxy materials should I receive if I share an address with another stockholder?

4

5

Whom should I contact if I have any questions?

5

6

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

6

7

Director Independence

6

7

Separation of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

6

7

Executive Sessions of our Board

6

7

Board of Directors Meetings and Committees

7

Limitations on Other Board Service

10

12

Communications with Directors

10

12

Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions

10

12

Stock Ownership Guidelines

11

13

No Hedging andor Pledging Permitted

11

13

Code of Ethics and Business Conduct

11

13

Board Oversight of Corporate Strategy and Enterprise Risk Oversight

11

13

Compensation Risk Assessment

12

14

PROPOSAL 1 - ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

13

16

Nominees Standing for Election

13

16

PROPOSAL 2 - NON-BINDING RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

17

22


AUDIT MATTERS

18

23

Audit and Non-Audit Fees

18

23

Pre-Approval of Audit and Non-Audit Fees

18

23

Report of the Audit Committee

18

24

PROPOSAL 3 - ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMPENSATION OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

20

25

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

22

26

EXECUTIVE AND DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

24

28

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

24

28

Executive Summary

28

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

33

Process for Determining Compensation – Independent Review and Use of Market Data

34

NEO Compensation for 2018

36

Non-Direct Compensation

42

Guidelines and Policies

43

Report of the Compensation Committee

35

46

Summary Compensation Table

36

47

Grants of Plan-Based Awards in 20152018

37

48

Employment and Transition Agreements

37

48

Outstanding Equity Awards at 20152018 Fiscal Year-End

38

49

Option Exercises and Stock Vested in 20152018

39

49


Nonqualified Deferred Compensation in 20152018

39

50

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

40

51

Table of Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

41

52

2018 CEO Pay Ratio

53

Director Compensation

43

54

20152018 Director Compensation Table

44

55

Director Stock Ownership Guidelines

56

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

46

57

Ownership of Common Stock – Directors and Executive Officers

46

57

Ownership of Common Stock – Principal Stockholders

47

57

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

47

58

OTHER

48

OTHER

59

No Incorporation by Reference

48

59

Forward-Looking Statements

59

48

APPENDIX: RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP DISCLOSURES

A-1

ii


CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA

CORECIVIC, INC.

PROXY STATEMENT

FOR

THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 12, 201616, 2019

We are providing this Proxy Statement in connection with the solicitation by the Board of Directors or the Board,(our “Board”) of Corrections Corporation of America,CoreCivic, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company,” “CCA,“CoreCivic,” “we” or “us”), of proxies to be voted at our 20162019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and any adjournmentadjournments or postponement of the meetingpostponements thereof (the “Annual Meeting”).

On or about March 30, 2016,April 4, 2019, a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) will be mailed to our stockholders as of March 18, 2019, the record date, containing instructions on how to access this Proxy Statement, and the Annual Report to Stockholders (including our Letter to Stockholders and 20152018 Annual Report on Form 10-K) and other proxy materials online, and how to vote. If you prefer to receive the proxy materials in the mail and to vote by mail, the Notice also contains instructions on how to request a printed copy. You will not receive printed copies of the proxy materials in the mail unless you specifically request them.

The Annual Meeting will take place on Thursday, May 12, 2016,16, 2019, at 10:00 a.m., local time, at our corporate headquarters, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee. All stockholders who are entitledTennessee 37215. If you plan to vote at the meeting are invited to attend. Seating atattend the Annual Meeting in person, you must be a stockholder as of March 18, 2019, the record date. However, because space is limited andat our corporate headquarters, you must register in advance to attend the Annual Meeting. In order to expedite the admissions process, stockholders desiring to attend the Annual Meeting must register for admission no later than 11:59 p.m. local time on Thursday, May 9, 2019. Requests for admission tickets will be availableaccepted on a first come, first served basis.first-come, first-served basis and such registration process may close prior to the registration cut-off date if room capacity is reached before 11:59 p.m. local time on May 9, 2019. All stockholders of record will need to present an admission ticket and a form of personal photo identification in order to be admitted to the Annual Meeting. Instructions on how stockholders can request an admission ticket are provided on page 2 of the Proxy Statement under the heading “What do I need to attend the Annual Meeting?”. The Notice provides proof of ownership or, if your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record, you may bring a brokerage statement dated on or after March 14, 2016 as proof of ownership with you to the Annual Meeting. To obtain directions to attend the Annual Meeting and vote in person, please contact Cameron Hopewell, our Managing Director, Investor Relations, at 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, (615) 263-3000.

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE

STOCKHOLDER MEETING TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 12, 2016.Thursday, May 16, 2019.

The Company’s Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Stockholders (including our Letter to Stockholders and 20152018 Annual Report on Form 10-K) are available on our website at www.cca.com.www.corecivic.com. Additionally, and in accordance with SEC rules, you may access our proxy materials athttp://materials.proxyvote.com/22025Y.

21871N.


INFORMATION ABOUT THE ANNUALANNUAL MEETING AND VOTING

What matters will be acted on at the Annual Meeting?

Stockholders are asked to consider and vote on the following matters at the Annual Meeting:

Proposal 1.

The election of 911 nominees named in this Proxy Statement to our Board of Directors.Board.

Proposal 2.

The non-binding ratification of the appointment by our Audit Committee of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

Proposal 3.

An advisory vote to approve the compensation paid to our named executive officers.Named Executive Officers.

Proposal 4.

Such other matters as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof.

As of the date of this Proxy Statement, we are not aware of any other matters that will be presented for action at the Annual Meeting.

Who is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting?

Stockholders of record of our common stock at the close of business on the “record date” are entitled to receive notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting. TheOur Board of Directors has fixed the close of business on March 14, 201618, 2019 as the record date.

As of the record date, there were 117,460,831119,067,887 shares of common stock outstanding and entitled to vote. Holders of common stock are entitled to one vote for each share of common stock held as of the record date on each matter to be voted on at the Annual Meeting.

What do I need to attend the Annual Meeting?

If you wish to attend the Annual Meeting, you must be a stockholder as of the March 14, 201618, 2019, the record date. You must request an admission ticket in advance by visitingwww.proxyvote.com and following the instructions provided (you will need the 12 digit control number included on the Notice, your proxy card or voter instruction form or Notice)form). TicketsAdmission tickets will be issued only to registered and beneficial owners.owners as of the record date. Stockholders who own shares as joint-tenants will be issued one admission ticket with both names on the ticket.

Requests for admission tickets will be processed in the order in which they are received and must be requestedreceived no later than 11:59 p.m. local time on Thursday, May 11, 2016.9, 2019. Please note that seatingspace is limited, and requests for admission tickets will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. The registration process may close prior to the registration cut-off date if room capacity is reached before 11:59 p.m. local time on May 9, 2019. On the day of the Annual Meeting, each stockholder will be required to present an admission ticket and valid picture identification such as a driver’s license or passport with their admission ticket.passport. No person will be admitted to the Annual Meeting without these credentials. Seating will begin at 9:15 a.m. local time and the Annual Meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. local time.

Please note that cameras (including cell phones with photographic or video capabilities), recording devices and other electronic devices will not be permitted at the meeting.Annual Meeting.

What areHow does our Board recommend I vote on each of the Board of Directors’ recommendations?proposals?

Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote:

FOR the election of each of the 911 nominees to serve as directors on our Board of Directors.Board.

FOR the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP.

FOR the approval, by a non-binding advisory vote, of the compensation paid to our named executive officers.

FOR the approval, by a non-binding advisory vote, of the compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers.

If you submit a signed proxy card or submit your proxy by telephone or internet and do not specify how you want your shares voted, the proxy holder will vote your shares withaccording to the recommendations of theour Board of Directors set forth above. Further, if any other matter properly comes before the Annual Meeting or any adjournmentadjournments or postponementpostponements thereof, the proxy holders will vote as recommended by theour Board of Directors or, if no recommendation is given, in their own discretion.

Why did I receive athe Notice in the mail instead of a full set of printed proxy materials?

Pursuant to rules adopted by the SEC,Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), we have elected to provide access to our proxy materials over the internet. Accordingly, we are sending athe Notice regarding the internet availability of the proxy materials to most of our stockholders of record and beneficial

owners. All stockholders will have the ability to access the proxy materials on the website referred to in the Notice or to request to receive a printed set of proxy materials. Instructions on how to access the proxy materials over the internet or to request a printed copy may be found in the Notice. In addition, stockholders may request receipt of proxy materials in printed form by mail or electronically by e-mail on an ongoing basis by following instructions set forth in the Notice.

How do I vote?

You can vote either in person by attending the Annual Meeting or by proxy without attending(whether or not you attend the Annual Meeting.Meeting).

If you are a record holder, you can submit your vote by proxy in any of the following ways:

vote by internet (instructions are in the Notice you received in the mail or are on the proxy card);

vote by toll-free telephone (instructions are on the proxy card); or

if you requested and received printed copies of this Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Stockholders (including our Letter to Stockholders and 20152018 Annual Report on Form 10-K) and other proxy materials, fillyou may vote by filling out the proxy card enclosed with the materials, date and sign it, and return it in the accompanying postage-paid envelope.

If a bank, broker or other nominee was the record holder of your stock on the record date, you will be able to instruct your bank, broker or other nominee on how to vote by following the instructions on the voting instruction form or the Notice that you receive from your bank, broker or other nominee. If you wish to vote in person at the Annual Meeting, you will need to present a valid proxy from your broker, bank or other nominee authorizing you to vote your shares at the Annual Meeting.

As a record holder, if you submit voting instructions by telephone or by the internet, you may change your vote by following the same instructions used in originally voting your shares. If your shares are held in the name of a broker, bank, trust or other nominee, you may change your voting instructions by following the instructions of your broker, bank, trust or other nominee. Attendance at the meetingAnnual Meeting will not by itself revoke a previously granted proxy.

Your vote is important. Whether or not you plan to attend the Annual Meeting in person, we urge you to submit your voting instructions to the proxy holders as soon as possible.

What are broker non-votes?

A “broker non-vote” occurs when a broker, bank or other nominee holding shares for a beneficial owner has not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner and the broker, bank or other nominee does not have


discretionary authority to vote the shares. Brokers, banks and other nominees do not have discretionary authority to vote on the election of directors to serve on our Board (Proposal 1) or the advisory vote to approve the compensation paid to our executive compensationNamed Executive Officers (Proposal 3). Thus, if you hold your shares in street name and do not provide voting instructions on these proposals to your broker, bank or other nominee, on these proposals, your shares will be considered to be broker non-votes and will not be voted on such proposal.proposals. Shares that constitute broker non-votes will be counted as present at the Annual Meeting for the purpose of determining a quorum, but will not be considered entitled to vote on the proposal in question.Proposal 1 or Proposal 3. Brokers, banks and other nominees generally have discretionary authority to vote on Proposal 2, the non‑binding ratification of the selection of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accountants.accounting firm.

What vote is required to approve each proposal?

Quorum Requirement. The presence, in person or by proxy, of the Company’s stockholders entitled to cast a majority of the votes entitled to be cast at the Annual Meeting is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the Annual Meeting. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be treated as shares present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum. Failure of a quorum to be represented at the Annual Meeting will necessitate an adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting, and will subject the Company to additional expense.

Election of Directors. Under the Company’s SeventhNinth Amended and Restated Bylaws (the “Bylaws”), adopted by our Board in December 2017, a majority of all of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting is required for the election of each nominee in an uncontested election of directors. A majority of votes cast means the number of shares cast “for” a nominee’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “against” that nominee. Brokers do not have discretionary authority to vote on the election of directors. Abstentions and broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the vote of the election of directors as they are not considered votes cast.

If a director nominee is an incumbent director and does not receive a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election, that director will continue to serve on our Board as a “holdover” director, but must tender his or her resignation to our Board promptly after certification of the election results of the stockholder vote. The Nominating and Governance Committee of our Board will then recommend to our Board whether to accept the resignation or whether other action should be taken. Our Board will act on the tendered resignation, taking into account the recommendation of our Nominating and Governance Committee, and our Board’s decision will be publicly disclosed within 90 days after certification of the election results of the stockholder vote. A director who tenders his or her resignation after failing to receive a majority of the votes cast will not participate in the recommendation of our Nominating and Governance Committee or the decision of our Board with respect to his or her resignation.

Non‑Binding Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP. The affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote is required to approve, on an advisory basis, the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019. If our stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP, our Audit Committee will reconsider the appointment and may affirm the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP or retain another independent accounting firm, in its sole discretion. Even if the appointment of Ernst & Young is ratified, our Audit Committee may in the future replace Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm at any time if it determines that a change would be in our best interest. Because brokers have discretionary authority to vote on the ratification of the selection of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accountants, we do not expect any broker non-votes in connection with this proposal. If you abstain from voting on this proposal, your abstention will have the same effect as a vote against the proposal.

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation. The affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote is required to approve the non‑binding advisory vote of compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers. Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding on our Board or the Company. However, our Board and our Compensation Committee will review the voting results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers. If you abstain from voting on this proposal, your abstention will have the same effect as a vote against the proposal.



Where can I find the Annual Meeting voting results?

We will announce the voting results at the Annual Meeting. We also will report the voting results on a Form 8-K, which we expect to file with the SEC within four business days after the Annual Meeting has been held.

How and when may I submit a stockholder proposal for the Company’s 2020 Annual Meeting?

Our annual meeting of stockholders generally is held in May of each year. Consistent with applicable SEC rules, we will consider for inclusion in our proxy materials for next year’s annual meeting stockholder proposals that are actually received at our executive offices no later than December 6, 2019 and that comply with other SEC rules regarding form and content. Proposals must be sent to our executive offices. Until June 30, 2019, proposals should be sent to CoreCivic, Attention: Secretary, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215. After June 30, 2019, please forward all proposals and correspondence to CoreCivic, Attention: Secretary, 5501 Virginia Way, Brentwood, Tennessee 37027.

Other stockholder proposals may be raised at next year’s annual meeting (but not considered for inclusion in our proxy materials) if timely received and otherwise in compliance with the advance notice provisions of our Bylaws. In order to be timely, notice must be actually received at our executive offices (the applicable address listed above) between February 16, 2020 and March 17, 2020.

How can I obtain the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K?

Any stockholder who desires a copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, as filed with the SEC, may obtain a copy without charge by visiting our website, www.corecivic.com. A copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K can also be obtained, free of charge, upon written request to CoreCivic, Attention: Cameron Hopewell, Managing Director of Investor Relations, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215. After June 30, 2019, please forward all correspondence to CoreCivic, Attention: Cameron Hopewell, 5501 Virginia Way, Brentwood, Tennessee 37027.

What are the costs of soliciting these proxies?

The Company pays the cost of soliciting proxies. Solicitation initially will be made by mail. Forms of proxies and proxy materials may also be distributed through brokers, custodians and other like parties to the beneficial owners of shares of our common stock, in which case we will reimburse these parties for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. Proxies may also be solicited personally or by telephone, e-mail or facsimile by directors, officers and employees of the Company. No additional compensation will be paid for these services.

How many copies of the Notice and proxy materials should I receive if I share an address with another stockholder?

The SEC has adopted rules that permit companies and intermediaries such as brokers to satisfy delivery requirements for proxy statements and annual reports with respect to two or more stockholders sharing the same address by delivering a single copy of the Notice and, to the extent requested, a single set of proxy materials addressed to those stockholders. This process, which is commonly referred to as “householding,” potentially provides extra convenience for stockholders and cost savings for companies. The Company and some brokers household proxy materials unless contrary instructions have been received from the affected stockholders. Once you have received notice from your broker or us that they or we will be householding materials to your address, householding will continue until you are notified otherwise or until you revoke your consent. If at any time you no longer wish to participate in householding and would prefer to receive a separate copy of the Notice or, to the extent requested, set of proxy materials, or if you are receiving multiple copies of proxy materials and wish to receive only one, please notify your broker if your shares are held in a brokerage account or our transfer agent, identified below, if you hold registered shares. You may also notify us by sending a written request to CoreCivic, Attention: Cameron Hopewell, Managing Director of Investor Relations, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, or by calling Cameron Hopewell at (615) 263-3000. After June 30, 2019, please forward all correspondence to CoreCivic, Attention: Cameron Hopewell, 5501 Virginia Way, Brentwood, Tennessee 37027.


Whom should I contact if I have any questions?

If you have any questions about the Annual Meeting or these proxy materials, please contact Cameron Hopewell, Managing Director of Investor Relations, at 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, (615) 263-3000. If you are a registered stockholder and have any questions about your ownership of our common stock, please contact our transfer agent, the American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, at 6201 15th Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11219, (800) 937-5449, or Cameron Hopewell, Managing Director of Investor Relations, at the address and phone number above. If your shares are held in a brokerage account, please contact your broker.


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

We believe effective corporate governance is important to our long-term success and our ability to create value for our stockholders. With leadership from our Nominating and Governance Committee, our Board regularly evaluates regulatory developments and trends in corporate governance to determine whether our policies and practices in this area should be enhanced. Our Nominating and Governance Committee also administers an annual self-evaluation process for our Board and its standing committees. In addition, our directors are encouraged to attend director education programs, which are reimbursed by the Company.

You can access our current corporate charter, Bylaws, Corporate Governance Guidelines, Board committee charters, Code of Ethics and certain other corporate governance information on our website, www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Director Independence

Messrs. Hininger and Lappin are not independent directors because they are employed by the Company. Our Board has determined that all of our other directors are independent. Accordingly, nine of our 11 current directors and director nominees are independent. Our Audit, Risk, Compensation and Nominating and Governance Committees are composed entirely of independent directors. In making its independence determinations, our Board used the requirements and standards for director independence prescribed by the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) and the SEC, and considers all relevant facts and circumstances.

Separation of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

We do not have a formal policy regarding the separation of our Chairman of the Board of Directors (our “Chairman”) and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) positions. In general, our Board believes the determination depends on the circumstances, including our Board’s evaluation of the person or persons available to serve in those positions and the needs of the Company at a particular time.

Pursuant to our Bylaws, our Chairman presides over meetings of our Board and meetings of the stockholders at which he or she is present, and has general oversight responsibility for our business and affairs. Our CEO has responsibility for implementation of the policies of the Company, as determined by our Board, and for the administration of our business affairs. Our CEO also has responsibility for presiding over any meeting of our Board or of the stockholders at which our Chairman is not present.

Since October 2009, the roles of Chairman and CEO have been held separately. Mark A. Emkes currently serves as our Chairman, while Damon T. Hininger serves as our President and CEO. Our Board believes the Company’s leadership structure is appropriate at this particular time. Having Mr. Hininger serve as President and CEO, while Mr. Emkes serves as our Chairman, helps us achieve important strategic objectives. Mr. Hininger is positioned to fully focus his energies on implementing our business strategy and administering our day-to-day affairs. Mr. Emkes is positioned to draw on his relationships with Board members and his past experience to effectively discharge the duties of Chairman, while also serving as a resource to Mr. Hininger. Our Board considers many factors when determining how to best select our Chairman, including: familiarity with the Company and its business, proximity in location to the Company’s headquarters, experience as a leader and consensus builder, willingness and availability to dedicate sufficient time to the Company and experience working with other public companies.

Executive Sessions of our Board

Executive sessions of our Board, or meetings of our independent directors without management present, are held periodically in order to provide an opportunity for the directors to discuss openly any and all matters. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that executive sessions of our Board are called and chaired by an independent director appointed from time to time by our Nominating and Governance Committee. Mark A. Emkes currently serves as the executive session chair.

Board Meetings and Committees

Our Board is responsible for establishing our broad corporate policies and strategic objectives, reviewing our overall performance and overseeing management’s performance. Among other things, our Board selects and


evaluates our executive officers, establishes, reviews and approves our corporate objectives and strategies and evaluates and approves major acquisitions and capital commitments.

Our Board currently consists of 11 directors, all of whom are standing for re-election at the Annual Meeting and are identified, along with their biographical information, under “Proposal 1—Election of Directors” beginning on page 16 of this Proxy Statement.

In 2018, our Board met six times in regular session, and our independent directors met five times in executive session. It is customary for our independent directors to meet in executive session prior to, and following the conclusion of, regular meetings of our Board. Each of our incumbent directors who served on the Board during 2018 attended at least 75% of the meetings of our Board and those committees on which such director was a member, during the period in which he or she served as a director, in the aggregate during 2018. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that all directors are expected to attend each annual meeting of stockholders. All of the directors serving on the Board at such time attended last year’s annual meeting of stockholders.

Our Board has five regularly standing committees: the Audit, Compensation, Nominating and Governance, Risk and Executive Committees. Each regularly standing committee has a written charter that has been approved by the committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee and our Board. Each committee charter is reviewed at least annually. Our Board and its committees may act by unanimous written consent without convening a meeting, and our Board appoints and delegates certain duties to special committees from time to time as permitted by our Bylaws. The table below shows the current composition of each of our regularly standing and special committees as of the date of this Proxy Statement, together with a summary of each committee’s responsibilities and the number of meetings each committee held in 2018. A more complete description of each standing committee follows the table.

Committee

Members

Summary of Responsibilities

2018

Meetings

Audit

John R. Prann, Jr. (Chair)

Donna M. Alvarado

Anne L. Mariucci

Devin I. Murphy

Responsibilities include oversight of the

integrity of our financial statements; the hiring,

qualifications, independence and performance

of our independent registered public

accountants; and the performance of

our internal audit function.

5

Compensation

Donna M. Alvarado (Chair)

Robert J. Dennis

Mark A. Emkes

John R. Prann, Jr.

Responsibilities include setting executive

officer compensation and overseeing the

evaluation of the executive officers’ performance,

and periodically reviewing and approving the

Company’s compensation philosophy

regarding executive compensation.

4

Nominating and

Governance

Charles L. Overby (Chair)

Mark A. Emkes

Stacia A. Hylton

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

Responsibilities include identifying and

recommending director nominees to the

full Board and taking a leadership role in

shaping and evaluating the Board’s

corporate governance initiatives.

4

Risk

Thurgood Marshall, Jr. (Chair)

Donna M. Alvarado

Anne L. Mariucci

Charles L. Overby

Responsibilities include coordinating the

Board’s oversight of the Company’s risk

assessment and enterprise risk management

practices, as well as the Company’s legal,

regulatory and contract compliance.

6

Executive

Mark A. Emkes (Chair)

Robert J. Dennis

Damon T. Hininger

Charles L. Overby

When necessary, and subject to authority

limitations with respect to significant corporate

actions, responsible for acting on behalf

of the full Board during intervals

between Board meetings.

Special

Litigation

Committee

Stacia A. Hylton (Chair)

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

Charles L. Overby

In response to stockholder demand

letters, our Board formed a

Special Litigation Committee in 2016.

7


Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee is responsible for:

overseeing the integrity of our financial statements;

reviewing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting;

supervising our relationship with our independent registered public accounting firm, including making decisions with respect to appointment or removal, fees, scope of audit services, approval of audit and non-audit services and annual evaluation of the audit firm’s independence;

monitoring preparation by our management of quarterly and annual financial reports and interim earnings releases and the performance of our internal audit function;

reviewing Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations prior to the filing of our periodic reports with the SEC;

overseeing management’s implementation and maintenance of effective systems of internal accounting and disclosure controls, including review of our internal auditing program;

overseeing and making determinations with respect to our Related Party Transaction policy; and

issuing the Report of the Audit Committee in this Proxy Statement.

Our Board has determined that each member of our Audit Committee is independent as defined by the standards of the NYSE and Rule 10A-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Our Board also has determined that each member is “financially literate” as defined by the rules of the NYSE, and that each of Ms. Mariucci, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Prann is qualified as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined in Item 407(d) of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act. The full text of the Audit Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Compensation Committee

Our Compensation Committee approves the compensation of our CEO and other executive officers, including annually reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives relevant to their compensation. Our Compensation Committee is responsible for ensuring that our compensation programs are designed to encourage high performance, promote accountability and adherence to Company values and align with the interests of our stockholders. Our Compensation Committee responsibilities include administration of cash and equity-based incentive compensation plans and stock ownership guidelines, evaluation of the performance of the executive officers and assessment of the material risks of our compensation programs. Our Compensation Committee is also responsible for reviewing, and making recommendations to our Board regarding, the compensation of our Board.

Our Compensation Committee has retained PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) as its independent compensation consultant since 2000, to provide advice and guidance on the design and market competitiveness of our executive compensation programs. PwC works directly with the chair of our Compensation Committee and, as directed by the chair of our Compensation Committee, with our CEO and other senior executives. In 2018, PwC was retained by the Company to provide asset valuation services and transfer pricing analysis with respect to which PwC was paid an aggregate amount of fees equal to approximately $168,000. PwC was also paid an aggregate amount of approximately $127,000 for consulting with our Compensation Committee on compensation matters. The valuation services were used in connection with REIT qualification testing and certain acquisitions. PwC has annually performed valuation services in anticipation of, and since, our initial conversion to a REIT. The decision to hire PwC for these services was made by management based on PwC’s experience and familiarity with the Company. Management reviews and obtains approval of the chair of our Compensation Committee prior to engaging PwC for


these services. Each year our Compensation Committee reviews the independence of the compensation consultants and other advisors who provide advice to our Compensation Committee, employing the independence factors specified in the NYSE listing standards. In its annual review of the independence of PwC in 2018, our Compensation Committee reviewed management’s retention of PwC for the other services. Our Compensation Committee has determined PwC is independent within the meaning of the NYSE listing standards, and the work performed by PwC for the Company does not raise any conflicts of interest. In 2017, PwC assisted our Compensation Committee by providing the following compensation consulting services:

performing a comprehensive review of our executive compensation program;

assessing our current peer group and selection methodology; and

recommending companies for inclusion in our peer group.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Our Board has determined that each of Donna M. Alvarado, (Chair), Robert J. Dennis, Mark A. Emkes and John R. Prann, Jr., who comprise all members of our Compensation Committee is independent as defined by the listing standards of the NYSE. In addition, there are no relationships among our executive officers, members of our Compensation Committee or entities whose executives serve on our Board or our Compensation Committee that require disclosure. Each member also qualifies as an “outside director” within the meaning of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and as a “non-employee director” within the meaning of the SEC’s Rule 16b-3. The full text of the Compensation Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Nominating and Governance Committee

Our Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for developing and overseeing our Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, and for monitoring the independence of our Board. Our Nominating and Governance Committee also determines Board membership qualifications; selects, evaluates and recommends to the Board nominees to fill vacancies as they arise; reviews the performance of our Board and its committees; and is responsible for director education. Other responsibilities include oversight of our Board’s self-evaluation process and leading our Board’s executive succession planning efforts. Our Board has determined that each member of our Nominating and Governance Committee is independent as defined by the listing standards of the NYSE. The full text of the Nominating and Governance Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Our Nominating and Governance Committee is authorized by our Board to identify director candidates; evaluate and consider candidates proposed by any director, member of management or stockholder; develop and implement screening processes it deems necessary and appropriate; and recommend for selection by our Board director nominees for each annual meeting of stockholders and, when necessary, vacancies on the Board. Our Nominating and Governance Committee is authorized by our Board to exercise sole authority in retaining any third-party search firm our Nominating and Governance Committee deems appropriate to identify and assist with the evaluation of director candidates; and has utilized that authority in past director searches.

Our Nominating and Governance Committee may utilize a variety of methods for identifying nominees for director. Candidates may come to the attention of our Nominating and Governance Committee through current Board members, stockholders, members of management, director search firms and other persons. A stockholder who wishes to recommend a prospective nominee for our Board should notify our Secretary in writing, along with any supporting material the stockholder considers appropriate, in accordance with the stockholder proposal provisions of our Bylaws. General information concerning the submission of stockholder proposals is provided above under the caption “How and when may I submit a stockholder proposal for the Company’s 2020 Annual Meeting?” Pursuant to Board policy, there are to be no differences in the manner in which our Nominating and Governance Committee evaluates candidates based on the source of the recommendation.


Our Nominating and Governance Committee evaluates prospective nominees against the criteria in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which include professional integrity and sound judgment; sufficient time available to devote to Board activities; a general understanding of marketing, finance and other elements relevant to the success of a publicly-traded company in today’s business environment; an understanding of our business; and factors such as diversity, age, skills and educational and professional background. With respect to diversity, our Nominating and Governance Committee considers diversity in terms of age, gender and ethnicity, as well as diversity of skills, expertise and experience, in its deliberations.

Our Nominating and Governance Committee may also consider other factors it deems relevant, including the current composition of our Board in terms of independence, expertise, experience and special knowledge required for the effective discharge of Board responsibilities; whether there is a need to fill vacancies or expand or contract the size of the Board; the balance of management and independent directors; the structure, membership and need for expertise on our standing committees; and the qualifications of other prospective nominees. Nominees are not discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or any other basis proscribed by law.

With respect to determining whether current directors should stand for re-election, our Nominating and Governance Committee considers the director’s past attendance at meetings and participation in and contributions to the activities of our Board and the Company. With respect to new candidates for Board service, a full evaluation may also include detailed background checks and in-person and telephonic interviews with our Nominating and Governance Committee and other Board members. Our Nominating and Governance Committee evaluation process culminates with a decision as to whether or not to recommend the prospective nominee to the full Board for appointment and/or nomination.

Mr. Murphy, who joined our Board in November 2018, was initially identified to our Nominating and Governance Committee by an existing non-management director. Our Nominating and Governance Committee then interviewed Mr. Murphy and other candidates, reviewed the qualifications, expertise and experience of such candidates, and ultimately recommended to the full Board that Mr. Murphy become a nominee for director.

Risk Committee

Our Risk Committee is charged with coordinating our Board’s oversight of our assessment and risk management practices (including our enterprise risk management ("ERM") program) and our legal, regulatory (including the special rules applicable to REITs) and contract compliance (particularly contracts with government entities). Our Risk Committee is also responsible for monitoring and reviewing public policy developments and other trends facing the Company that could impact our operations and performance. Our Risk Committee further assists our Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibility with respect to organizational ethics and compliance, and receives regular reports from our Corporate Ethics and Compliance Officer, who reports to the CEO, and to the chair of our Risk Committee. The full text of the Risk Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Executive Committee

Our Executive Committee is charged with acting on behalf of the full Board when necessary and subject to authority limitations with respect to the transaction of routine, administrative matters that occur between regularly scheduled Board meetings. The full text of the Executive Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Special Litigation Committee

In response to stockholder demand letters, our Board formed a Special Litigation Committee to take any actions it deems appropriate or necessary to investigate, respond and otherwise properly address the matters alleged in the demand letters. The Special Litigation Committee has retained independent legal counsel to advise the committee in the performance of its duties.


Limitations on Other Board Service

The Audit Committee charter provides that a member of our Audit Committee may not serve on the audit committee of more than two other public companies without Board approval. Otherwise, we do not believe our directors should be categorically prohibited from serving on boards and/or board committees of other organizations. However, our Corporate Governance Guidelines instruct our Nominating and Governance Committee and our Board to take into account the nature of and time involved with respect to a director’s service on other boards, as well as other job responsibilities, in evaluating the suitability of individual directors and in making its recommendations to our stockholders. Service on boards and/or committees of other organizations must also be consistent with our conflicts of interest policy, as set forth in our Code of Ethics. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require a director to provide notice to the Chair of our Nominating and Governance Committee of his or her acceptance of a nomination to serve on the board of another public company in the case where such nomination has not been previously disclosed.

Communications with Directors

Stockholders, employees and other interested parties may communicate with members of our Board (including specific members of our Board or our independent directors as a group) by writing to CoreCivic, Attention: Secretary, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215 until June 30, 2019. After June 30, 2019, please forward all correspondence to CoreCivic, Attention: Secretary, 5501 Virginia Way, Brentwood, Tennessee 37027. To the extent such communications are received, our Secretary compiles all substantive communications and periodically submits them to our Board, the group of directors or the individual directors to whom they are addressed. Communications that the Secretary would not consider “substantive,” and therefore may exercise discretion in submitting to the addressee, may include, but are not limited to, junk mail, mass mailings, resumes and job inquiries, surveys, business solicitations, advertisements, frivolous communications and other similarly unsuitable communications.

Communications expressing concerns or complaints relating to accounting, internal controls or auditing matters are handled in accordance with procedures established by our Audit Committee. Under those procedures, concerns that are improperly characterized as having to do with accounting, internal controls or auditing matters or that are frivolous or clearly inconsequential may be addressed by the Secretary without presentation to our Audit Committee.

Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions

Since the beginning of the last fiscal year, we are aware of no related party transactions between us and any of our directors, executive officers, 5% stockholders or their family members that require disclosure under Item 404 of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act.

Pursuant to its written charter, our Audit Committee has adopted a Related Party Transaction Policy that, subject to certain exceptions, requires our Audit Committee (or the chair of our Audit Committee in certain instances) to review and either ratify, approve or disapprove all “Interested Transactions,” which are generally defined to include any transaction, arrangement or relationship or series of similar transactions, arrangements or relationships (including any indebtedness or guarantee of indebtedness) in which:

the aggregate amount involved exceeded, or will or may be expected to exceed, $120,000 in any calendar year;

the Company was, is or will be a participant; and

any Related Party had, has or will have a direct or indirect interest.

For purposes of the policy, a “Related Party” is any:

person who is or was (since the beginning of the last fiscal year for which the Company has filed an Annual Report on Form 10-K and proxy statement, even if they do not presently serve in that role) an executive officer, director or nominee for election as a director;


greater than 5% beneficial owner of the Company’s common stock;

immediate family member of any of the foregoing; or

firm, corporation or other entity in which any of the foregoing persons is employed or is a general partner, managing member or principal or in a similar position or in which such person has a 10% or greater beneficial ownership interest.

In determining whether to approve or ratify an Interested Transaction under the policy, our Audit Committee is to consider all relevant information and facts available to it regarding the Interested Transaction and take into account factors such as the Related Party’s relationship to the Company and interest (direct or indirect) in the transaction, the terms of the transaction and the benefits to the Company of the transaction. No director is to participate in the approval of an Interested Transaction for which he or she is a Related Party or otherwise has a direct or indirect interest.

In addition, our Audit Committee is to review and assess ongoing Interested Transactions, if any, on at least an annual basis to determine whether any such transactions remain appropriate or should be modified or terminated.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

We maintain stock ownership guidelines for our executive officers and non-executive directors because we believe it is important to align the interests of our management and our Board with the interests of our stockholders. The guidelines are discussed in detail under “Executive and Director Compensation – Guidelines and Policies – Executive Officer Stock Ownership Guidelines” and “Executive and Director Compensation – Director Compensation – Director Stock Ownership Guidelines” included in this Proxy Statement and are accessible on our website, www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

No Hedging or Pledging Permitted

Our insider trading guidelines include provisions that prohibit members of our Board, executive officers, other officers and employees from engaging in hedging or pledging transactions involving Company securities. None of the members of our Board or our executive officers are engaged in any hedging or pledging transactions involving Company securities.

Code of Ethics

All of our directors and employees, including our CEO, Chief Financial Officer and principal accounting officer, are subject to our Code of Ethics. Our Code of Ethics and related compliance policies are designed to promote an environment in which integrity is valued, business is conducted in a legal and ethical manner and ethics and compliance issues are raised and addressed. Our Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing our Code of Ethics annually, and our Risk Committee is responsible for addressing any violations or waivers involving our executive officers and directors. We intend to post any amendments to or waivers from our Code of Ethics (to the extent applicable to our directors, CEO, principal financial officer or principal accounting officer) on our website. Our Code of Ethics is accessible on our website, www.corecivic.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Board Oversight of Corporate Strategy and Enterprise Risk

Our Board engages in proactive oversight and regular review of the development, evaluation and execution of our annual operating plan and long-term growth, diversification and investment strategies. Each regular meeting of our Board includes a comprehensive business update presented by our CEO, which addresses our progress in achieving near-term operational objectives, strategic transactions completed and new opportunities being actively pursued, as well as current and future challenges to our continued success. Each such meeting also includes presentations from members of the executive team who are directly responsible for the implementation of our growth and diversification strategy, the integration of new acquisitions and the financial performance of our


business. At our Board’s two-day retreat in August of each year, management engages our Board in a detailed discussion of our growth and investment strategy, target opportunities, risks and challenges, and proposals for modifying our strategies to improve results. At its annual December meeting, our Board is provided the opportunity to challenge management on the details of our annual operating plan prior to its approval. In addition to the opportunity to engage management and independent consultants we retain to assist with the development and execution of our growth strategy, our independent directors set aside time at each meeting to meet in executive session to review and deliberate upon management’s performance in strategy development and execution.

Our Risk Committee performs a leadership role on behalf of our Board and our Audit Committee in the oversight of our risk assessment and risk management practices, and assists our Board and Audit Committee with oversight of our financial, legal, contractual and regulatory risks and organizational ethics and compliance. Our Risk Committee is also charged with oversight of management’s ERM program.

Management’s ERM program entails the identification, prioritization and assessment of a broad range of risks (e.g., financial, operational, business, reputational, governance and managerial), and the formulation of plans to develop and improve controls for managing these risks or mitigating their effects in an integrated effort involving our Board, relevant Board committees, management and other personnel. Our ERM program is led by our General Counsel, is a component of management’s strategic planning process and is overseen by our Risk Committee with periodic reports to the full Board.

The full Board maintains an ongoing, direct role in risk oversight through, among other things, regular reports from the Chair of our Risk Committee, regular reports from our CEO on the ERM process and oversight of management’s strategic planning process, which includes an evaluation of opportunities and risks presented by the Company’s current strategies and alternative strategies. Our Board also receives regular reports from each of the executives with respect to their areas of managerial responsibility. These reports include information concerning risks and risk mitigation strategies. For example, our Board receives regular reports from our Chief Corrections Officer with respect to key areas of operational risk; monitors risks relating to our partnership development efforts through regular reports from our Chief Development Officer; and receives regular reports from our General Counsel with respect to legal and compliance risks. In addition, our Board evaluates risk in the context of particular business strategies and transactions. For example, our Board monitors significant capital expenditures through its annual budget review and quarterly capital expenditure reports from management, and monitors risk relating to our acquisition and financing activities through in depth reviews of proposed acquisition and financing transactions.

In addition to our Risk Committee, other standing committees of our Board have responsibility for risk oversight within their areas of oversight. Our Audit Committee focuses on financial risk, including fraud risk and risks relating to our internal controls over financial reporting. It receives an annual risk assessment report from our internal auditors, as well as financial risk assessment information in connection with particular events or transactions. Our Nominating and Governance Committee addresses certain governance-related risks, such as risks related to Board and executive management succession planning. As discussed in detail below, our Compensation Committee addresses risks relating to our executive compensation strategies. The full Board receives regular reports from the chairs of these committees and receives copies of meeting materials provided to each of the committees.

Compensation Risk Assessment

In setting compensation, our Compensation Committee considers risks in the achievement of the Company’s goals that may be inherent in the compensation program as well as the risks to CoreCivic’s stockholders. Although a significant portion of our executives’ compensation is performance-based and “at-risk,” our Compensation Committee believes our executive compensation plans are appropriately structured and do not pose a material risk to CoreCivic. Our Compensation Committee considered the following elements of our executive compensation plans and policies when evaluating whether such plans and policies encourage our executives to take unreasonable risks:

We set performance goals we believe are reasonable, but uncertain, in light of past performance and current market and economic conditions.

The financial and strategic business goals used for determining payouts under our incentive compensation plans are aligned with our near-term and long-term operating and strategic growth plans,


and are established at challenging, but appropriate, levels that do not encourage unnecessary or excessive risk taking.

We use restricted stock units rather than stock options for equity awards because, unlike options, restricted stock units retain value even in a depressed market.

Performance-based vesting over multiple years for our long-term equity incentive awards promotes the alignment of our executives’ interests with those of our stockholders for the long-term performance of the Company.

Assuming achievement of at least a minimum level of performance, payouts under our performance-based plans result in some compensation at levels below full target achievement, rather than an “all-or-nothing” approach.

Our executive stock ownership guidelines require our executives to hold significant levels of our stock, which aligns an appropriate portion of their personal wealth to the long-term performance of the Company.


PROPOSAL 1 - ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Our Board reflects a diverse, highly engaged group of directors with a wide range of relevant experience:

Independence

82%

CEO / Senior Leadership Experience

100%

Gender / Ethnic Diversity

36%

Other Public Company Board Experience

64%

Tenure

1 – 4 Years

27%

5 – 9 Years

27%

10+ Years

45%

*Percentage calculations are rounded to the nearest whole number.

The current term of office of each of our directors expires at the Annual Meeting. Our Board has nominated the following 11 nominees, all of whom are currently serving as directors, for election to serve until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors are duly elected and qualified. We expect each of the 11 nominees to serve if elected. If any of them becomes unavailable to serve as a director, our Board may designate a substitute nominee. In that case, the persons named as proxies will vote for the substitute nominee designated by our Board.

The general criteria considered by our Nominating and Governance Committee with respect to director nominees are discussed beginning on page 10 of this Proxy Statement under the heading “Nominating and Governance Committee.” Based on the evaluation of those criteria, our Nominating and Governance Committee and Board believe each nominee contributes relevant skills, expertise and experience to our Board, and that the group of nominees collectively has the skills, expertise, experience, independence and other attributes necessary to discharge effectively our Board’s oversight responsibilities on behalf of our stockholders.

Nominees Standing for Election

Information regarding each of the nominees for director, including particular qualifications considered for each nominee, is set forth below. Directors’ ages are given as of the date of this Proxy Statement.

DAMON T. HININGER

Director since 2009

Mr. Hininger, age 49, has served as a director and our President and Chief Executive Officer since October 2009. From 2008 until 2009, he served as our President and Chief Operating Officer. From 2007 until 2008, he served as our Senior Vice President, Federal and Local Customer Relations, after having served as Vice President, Federal and Local Customer Relations since 2002. Prior to 2002, he held several positions of increasing responsibility with the Company. Mr. Hininger joined the Company in 1992 as a correctional officer at the Leavenworth Detention Center. He serves on the Board of Trustees of the United Way of Metropolitan Nashville and Belmont University, where he also serves on the Board of Advisors for the Massey School of Business. Mr. Hininger also serves on the Board of Directors of the Nashville Public Education Foundation, the Men of Valor, the Kansas State University Foundation and as a member of the Executive Board of the Middle Tennessee Council of the Boy Scouts of America. Mr. Hininger holds a bachelor’s degree from Kansas State University and a master’s degree in business administration from the Jack Massey School of Business at Belmont University.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Hininger to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his current service as our President and CEO and his comprehensive knowledge of the Company, its business, operations and management team through his current position and past roles with the Company, including roles at the facility operations level, as Chief Operating Officer and as Senior Vice President, Federal and Local Customer Relations.


DONNA M. ALVARADO

Director since 2003

Ms. Alvarado, age 70, has served as a director since December 2003, and serves as Chair of our Compensation Committee. She also serves as a member of our Audit Committee and Risk Committee. Ms. Alvarado is the founder and president of Aguila International, an international business consulting firm specializing in human resources and leadership development. Ms. Alvarado has held senior management positions in government, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense with the U.S. Department of Defense and Director of ACTION, the federal domestic volunteer agency. Ms. Alvarado serves as a director and member of the audit, compensation and public affairs committees of CSX Corporation, a publicly-traded provider of rail and other transportation services. She serves as a director and chair of the nominating and corporate governance committee, as well as a member of the audit and risk committees, of Park National Corporation, a publicly-traded bank holding company. Ms. Alvarado has served as a member and as chair of both the Ohio Board of Regents and the Ohio Workforce Policy Board. She holds both a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree in Spanish from The Ohio State University, completed doctoral coursework in Latin American literature at the University of Oklahoma and earned a postgraduate certificate in financial management from the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.

In making the decision to nominate Ms. Alvarado to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, her understanding of government through her public sector experience; her experience as a public company director and member of audit, compensation, risk and nominating and corporate governance committees; her human resources and leadership development expertise; her civic and community involvement; and her contribution to the Board’s gender and cultural diversity.

ROBERT J. DENNIS

Director since 2013

Mr. Dennis, age 65, has served as a director since February 2013, and serves as a member of our Compensation Committee and Executive Committee. Mr. Dennis is the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the board of directors of Genesco Inc., a publicly traded retailer of footwear, headwear, sports apparel and accessories, where he has served in an executive capacity since 2004. Prior to joining Genesco, Mr. Dennis held senior management positions with Hat World Corporation and Asbury Automotive, and was a partner and leader of the North American Retail Practice with McKinsey & Company. Mr. Dennis serves as a director and member of the governance committee and the finance and investments committee of HCA Holdings, Inc., a publicly traded health care services company. Mr. Dennis serves on the Board of Trustees of the United Way of Metropolitan Nashville, the Board of Leadership Nashville, and serves on the Board of Visitors at Vanderbilt University’s Owen School of Management. Mr. Dennis holds a master’s degree in business administration, with distinction, from the Harvard Business School, and bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Dennis to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his leadership experience as chief executive officer of a public company; his public company director experience; his demonstrated business acumen; his understanding of corporate finance and business development matters; and his civic and community involvement.

MARK A. EMKES

Director since 2014

Mr. Emkes, age 66, has served as a director since August 2014, and serves as the independent Chairman of the Board. He also serves as a member of our Compensation Committee, Nominating and Governance Committee and Executive Committee Chair. From 2011 until 2013, Mr. Emkes served as the State of Tennessee’s Commissioner of Finance and Administration. For more than five years until his retirement in 2010, Mr. Emkes served as Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the board of directors of Bridgestone Americas, Inc. and Bridgestone Americas Holdings, Inc., a tire and rubber manufacturing company. He also served as President of Bridgestone Americas, Inc. from January 2009 until his retirement. From 2004 until 2010, Mr. Emkes also served as a director of Bridgestone Corporation. Mr. Emkes serves as a director and member of the compensation committee of Greif, Inc., a publicly traded industrial packaging products and services company, and as a director and chair of the audit committee of First Horizon National Corporation, a publicly traded regional financial institution. Mr. Emkes has served as President of the Middle Tennessee Council of the Boy Scouts of America, the Board of Directors of the Community


Foundation of Middle Tennessee and the Advisory Board of Habitat for Humanity, Nashville Chapter. Mr. Emkes was the 2011 recipient of the Jennings A. Jones Champion of Free Enterprise Award, and was inducted into the Nashville Business Hall of Fame in 2012. Mr. Emkes holds a bachelor’s degree in economics from DePauw University and a master’s degree in business administration from the Thunderbird School of Global Management.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Emkes to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his leadership experience in various management positions, including as chief executive officer and chairman of an international company; his demonstrated business acumen and his understanding of corporate finance and business development matters; and his civic and community involvement.

STACIA A. HYLTON

Director since 2016

Ms. Hylton, age 58, has served as a director since August 2016, and is a member of our Nominating and Governance Committee and Chair of our Special Litigation Committee. Since 2016, Ms. Hylton has served as a Principal for LS Advisory, a New Jersey-based business solutions advisory consultancy. In 2010, Ms. Hylton was nominated by U.S. President Barack Obama to serve as Director of the U.S. Marshals Service ("USMS"), a federal agency with more than 5,600 employees responsible for federal judiciary security, fugitive operations, asset forfeitures, prisoner operations, transportation and witness security, and served as Director of the USMS until her retirement in 2015. She served as the U.S. Attorney General’s Federal Detention Trustee in the U.S. Department of Justice from 2004 to 2010. From 1980 to 2004, Ms. Hylton served in progressively senior leadership positions within the USMS. Ms. Hylton serves as a director and member of the audit committee of Spok Holdings, Inc., a publicly-traded provider of communications solutions. Ms. Hylton is a Fellow for the National Academy for Public Administration, and has served on the Board of Directors of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and Law Enforcement Exploring. Ms. Hylton has served on the Executive Committee for the International Chiefs of Police and the Accreditation and Policy Committees for the National Sheriffs Association. Ms. Hylton holds a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice from Northeastern University.

In making the decision to nominate Ms. Hylton to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, her understanding of government through her public sector experience; her experience as a public company director and member of an audit committee; her unique understanding of the USMS; her civic and community involvement; and her contribution to the Board’s gender diversity.

HARLEY G. LAPPIN

Director since 2018

Mr. Lappin, age 63, has served as a director and has been employed as a special operations advisor to the leadership team of the Company since January 2018. Mr. Lappin served as our Executive Vice President and Chief Corrections Officer from 2011 until his retirement from such position on January 1, 2018. Prior to joining the Company in 2011, Mr. Lappin served since 2003 as Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"). As Director of the BOP, Mr. Lappin had oversight and management responsibility for 116 federal prisons, 14 large, private contract facilities and more than 250 contracts for community corrections facilities, in total comprising more than 215,000 offenders managed by 38,000 employees. Mr. Lappin has received numerous awards throughout his career, including the Associate Warden of the Year award for the BOP’s South Central Region (1992); the BOP’s Excellence in Prison Management Award (2000); the Attorney General’s Award for Excellence in Management (2001); and the Presidential Rank Award of Meritorious Executive (2004). In 2010, he received the American Correctional Association’s ("ACA") E.R. Cass Award for Correctional Achievement, the highest honor bestowed by that organization. In 2015, Mr. Lappin received the Louie L. Wainwright Award from the Association of State Correctional Administrators ("ASCA"). Mr. Lappin has served as chair of the Standards Committee of the ACA, is a former board member of both the National Institute of Corrections and the Federal Prison Industry Board, and a former chair of the Prison Industry Committee of ASCA. Mr. Lappin holds a bachelor’s degree from Indiana University and a master’s degree in criminal justice from Kent State University.


In making the decision to nominate Mr. Lappin to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his comprehensive corrections industry experience, including executive leadership of federal and private sector correctional system operations; his public company leadership experience; his understanding of government through his public sector experience; and his extensive knowledge of the Company, its business, operations, facilities, customers and personnel through his past role as our Chief Corrections Officer.

ANNE L. MARIUCCI

Director since 2011

Ms. Mariucci, age 61, has served as a director since December 2011, and serves as a member of our Audit Committee and Risk Committee. Since 2003, she has been affiliated with private equity firms Hawkeye Partners (Austin, Texas), Inlign Capital Partners (Phoenix, Arizona) and Glencoe Capital (Chicago, Illinois). Prior to 2003, Ms. Mariucci served in a variety of senior executive roles with Del Webb Corporation, and following its 2001 merger with Pulte Homes, Inc., as President of Del Webb Group and Senior Vice President of Strategy for Pulte Homes, Inc. Ms. Mariucci serves as a director of Taylor Morrison Home Corporation, a publicly-traded homebuilder where she serves as Chair, Compensation Committee, and as a member of the Audit and Nominating & Governance committees. Ms. Mariucci also serves as a director of Southwest Gas Holdings, Inc. a publicly-traded holding company, where she serves as Chair of the Pension Investment Committee and as a member of the Compensation and Nominating & Corporate Governance Committees. Ms. Mariucci serves as a director of Berry Petroleum, where she serves as Chair of the Nomination/Governance Committee, and member of the Compensation and Audit Committees. Ms. Mariucci serves as a director of Banner Health, a non-profit health system, where she serves as a member of the Audit and Compensation Committees. Ms. Mariucci serves as a director of the Arizona State University Foundation and the Fresh Start Womenʼs Foundation. Ms. Mariucci is a past director of the Arizona State Retirement System, Scottsdale Healthcare and Action Performance Companies, as well as a past trustee of the Urban Land Institute. She also served on the Arizona Board of Regents. Ms. Mariucci holds a bachelor’s degree in accounting and finance from the University of Arizona and completed the corporate finance program at the Stanford University Graduate School of Business.

In making the decision to nominate Ms. Mariucci to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, her public company executive leadership experience; her understanding of and experience with the State of Arizona, a state where a significant portion of our operations is located; her background in accounting and corporate finance; her experience and knowledge with real estate; her experience as a public company director and member of audit and compensation committees; her civic and community involvement; and her contribution to the Board’s gender diversity.

THURGOOD MARSHALL, JR.

Director since 2002

Mr. Marshall, age 62, has served as a director since December 2002, and serves as Chair of our Risk Committee and as a member of our Nominating and Governance Committee and our Special Litigation Committee. He is a partner in the Washington D.C. office of the law firm of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, and a principal in the firm’s Morgan Lewis Consulting Group LLC, which assists business clients with communications, political and legal strategies. Mr. Marshall has held appointments in all three branches of the federal government. Prior to joining a predecessor of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP in 2001, he served as Assistant to the President and Cabinet Secretary from 1997 to 2001. Mr. Marshall has served as Director of Legislative Affairs and Deputy Counsel to the Vice President, and as counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and the Senate Government Affairs Committee. In 2006, he was confirmed by the United States Senate to serve on the Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service, and served as Chairman prior to completing his service in 2013. Mr. Marshall serves as a director of Genesco Inc., a publicly traded retailer of footwear, headwear, sports apparel and accessories. He is a former member of the Board of Trustees of the Ford Foundation and the Ethics & Compliance Certification Institute. Mr. Marshall serves as a trustee on three non-profit boards – The Third Way, Campaign Legal Center and President Lincolnʼs Cottage. Mr. Marshall holds a bachelor’s degree and a juris doctor from the University of Virginia, and served as a law clerk for United States District Judge Barrington D. Parker.


In making the decision to nominate Mr. Marshall to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his understanding of politics and the public sector through his varied government service and consulting work; his understanding of organizational governance and oversight through his service as a director in the public, non-profit and for-profit sectors; his understanding of legal, regulatory and compliance issues through his education and experience as a lawyer; and his contribution to the Board’s cultural diversity.

DEVIN I. MURPHY

Director since 2018

Mr. Murphy, age 59, joined CoreCivicʼs Board of Directors in November 2018 and serves on the Audit Committee. He is Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of Phillips Edison & Company, one of the nation's largest owners and operators of grocery-anchored shopping centers. He previously served as Vice Chairman of Investment Banking at Morgan Stanley. Mr. Murphy began his real estate career in 1986, when he joined the real estate group at Morgan Stanley as an associate. He held a number of senior positions at Morgan Stanley including co-head of U.S. real estate investment banking and head of the private capital markets group. He also served on the investment committee of the Morgan Stanley Real Estate Funds, a series of global private real estate funds with over $30 billion of assets under management. Mr. Murphy also served as global head of real estate investment banking for Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. Mr. Murphy is an advisory director of Hawkeye Partners, a real estate private equity firm headquartered in Austin, Texas, and of Trigate Capital, a real estate private equity firm headquartered in Dallas, Texas. Mr. Murphy received a Bachelor of Arts with Honors from the College of William and Mary, and a Master of Business Administration from the University of Michigan.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Murphy to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria above, his executive leadership of real estate and finance‑focused organizations; his broad exposure to private equity, banking and other investment businesses; and his high level leadership roles in complex merger and acquisition transactions and activities.

CHARLES L. OVERBY

Director since 2001

Mr. Overby, age 72, has served as a director since December 2001, and serves as Chair of our Nominating and Governance Committee and as a member of our Executive Committee, our Risk Committee and our Special Litigation Committee. From 1989 until 2011, Mr. Overby served as Chief Executive Officer of The Freedom Forum, an independent, non-partisan foundation dedicated to the First Amendment and media issues, and its predecessor, The Gannett Foundation. Mr. Overby served from 1997 to 2011 as Chief Executive Officer of The Freedom Forum’s affiliate, Newseum, an interactive museum in Washington, D.C. committed to educating visitors on free expression and the First Amendment. Prior to leading The Freedom Forum, Mr. Overby served for 16 years as a reporter, editor and corporate executive with Gannett Co., Inc., the nation’s largest newspaper company and publisher of USA TODAY, including roles as a Pulitzer Prize-winning editor at The Clarion-Ledger in Jackson, Mississippi. Mr. Overby serves as Chairman of the Overby Center for Southern Journalism and Politics at the University of Mississippi and on the Board of Trustees of the Andrew Jackson Foundation. Mr. Overby holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Mississippi.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Overby to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his executive leadership experience and understanding of corporate governance as chief executive of several non-profit organizations; his understanding of media and public relations through his career as a journalist, print media executive and executive with other media-related organizations; his political experience; and his civic and community involvement and leadership.



JOHN R. PRANN, JR.

Director since 2000

Mr. Prann, age 68, has served as a director since December 2000, and serves as Chair of our Audit Committee. He also serves as a member of our Compensation Committee. From 2009 to 2016, Mr. Prann served as Chairman of the board of directors of a privately held motorsports business. From 2012 to 2014, Mr. Prann served as a Senior Advisor to The Pritzker Group, a private capital, venture capital and asset management firm. From 1993 to 2001, Mr. Prann served as President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer of Katy Industries, Inc., a publicly traded manufacturer and distributor of consumer products and maintenance cleaning products. Mr. Prann also served as President and Chief Executive Officer of CRL, Inc., a diversified holding company that held a 25% interest in Katy Industries, Inc. Mr. Prann served as a director of CPAC, Inc., a publicly traded chemicals and equipment business, and Dynojet Research, Inc. He has served as a partner with the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche. Mr. Prann holds a bachelor’s degree in biology from the University of California, Riverside, and a master’s degree in business administration from the University of Chicago.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Prann to serve as a director, our Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his executive leadership experience as president and chief executive of a public company and his understanding of accounting and finance issues through his education and career.

Under the Company’s Bylaws, a majority of all of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting is required for the election of each nominee in an uncontested election of directors. A majority of votes cast means the number of shares cast “for” a nominee’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “against” that nominee. Brokers do not have discretionary authority to vote on the election of directors. Abstentions and broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the vote of the election of directors as they are not considered votes cast.

Director nominees in contested elections will continue to be elected by plurality vote. An election will be considered contested if conducted at a meeting at which a stockholder has nominated an individual for election for director in compliance with the advance notice requirements set forth in the Bylaws, and such stockholder nomination has not been withdrawn on or prior to the tenth day preceding the date the Company first mails its notice of such meeting to the stockholders.

If a director nominee is an incumbent director and does not receive a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election, that director will continue to serve on theour Board as a “holdover” director, but must tender his or her resignation to theour Board promptly after certification of the election results of the stockholder vote. The Nominating and Governance Committee of theour Board will then recommend to theour Board whether to accept the resignation or whether other action should be taken. TheOur Board will act on the tendered resignation, taking into account the recommendation of theour Nominating and Governance Committee, and theour Board’s decision will be publicly disclosed within 90 days after certification of the election results of the stockholder vote. A director who tenders his or her resignation after failing to receive a majority of the votes cast will not participate in the recommendation of theour Nominating and Governance Committee or the decision of theour Board with respect to his or her resignation.

Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP. The affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast is required to approve the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016. If the Company’s stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP, the Audit Committee will reconsider the appointment and may affirm the appointment or retain another independent accounting firm. If the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee may in the future replace Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm if it is in the Company’s best interest to do so. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as “for” or “against” the ratification and thus will have no effect on the proposal. Because brokers have discretionary authority to vote on the ratification of auditor, we do not expect any broker non-votes in connection with this proposal.

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation. The affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast is required to approve the non-binding advisory vote of compensation paid to our named executive officers. Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding on the Board of Directors or the Company. However, the Board of Directors will review the voting results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation paid by the Company to its named executive officers. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as “for” or “against” the approval of our advisory vote on executive compensation and thus will have no effect on this proposal.

Where can I find the voting results?

We will announce the voting results at the Annual Meeting. We also will report the voting results on a Form 8-K, which we expect to file with the SEC within four business days after the Annual Meeting has been held.

How and when may I submit a stockholder proposal for the Company’s 2017 Annual Meeting?

Our annual meeting of stockholders generally is held in May of each year. Consistent with applicable SEC rules, we will consider for inclusion in our proxy materials for next year’s annual meeting stockholder proposals that are received at our executive offices no later than December 2, 2016 and that comply with other SEC rules regarding form and content. Proposals must be sent to the following address: CCA, Attention: Secretary, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215.

Other stockholder proposals may be raised at next year’s annual meeting (but not considered for inclusion in our proxy materials) if timely received and otherwise in compliance with the advance notice provisions of our Bylaws. In order to be timely, notice must be received at our executive offices (the address listed above) between February 13, 2017 and March 13, 2017.

How can I obtain the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K?

Any stockholder who desires a copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, as filed with the SEC, may obtain a copy without charge by visiting our website, www.cca.com. A copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K can also be obtained, free of charge, upon written request to the Managing Director of Investor Relations, Corrections Corporation of America, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215.

What are the costs of soliciting these proxies?

The Company pays the cost of soliciting proxies. Solicitation initially will be made by mail. Forms of proxies and proxy materials may also be distributed through brokers, custodians and other like parties to the beneficial owners of shares of our common stock, in which case we will reimburse these parties for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. Proxies may also be solicited personally or by telephone or fax by directors, officers and employees of the Company. No additional compensation will be paid for these services.

How many copies should I receive if I share an address with another stockholder?

The SEC has adopted rules that permit companies and intermediaries such as brokers to satisfy delivery requirements for proxy statements and annual reports with respect to two or more stockholders sharing the same address by delivering a single Notice and, to the extent requested, single set of proxy materials addressed to those stockholders. This process, which is commonly referred to as

“householding,” potentially provides extra convenience for stockholders and cost savings for companies. The Company and some brokers household proxy materials unless contrary instructions have been received from the affected stockholders. Once you have received notice from your broker or us that they or we will be householding materials to your address, householding will continue until you are notified otherwise or until you revoke your consent. If at any time you no longer wish to participate in householding and would prefer to receive a separate Notice or, to the extent requested, set of proxy materials, or if you are receiving multiple copies of proxy materials and wish to receive only one, please notify your broker if your shares are held in a brokerage account or our transfer agent, identified below, if you hold registered shares. You can also notify us by sending a written request to CCA, Attention: Cameron Hopewell, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, or by calling Cameron Hopewell at (615)  263-3000.

Whom should I contact if I have any questions?

If you have any questions about the Annual Meeting or these proxy materials, please contact Cameron Hopewell, our Managing Director of Investor Relations, at 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, (615) 263-3000. If you are a registered stockholder and have any questions about your ownership of our common stock, please contact our transfer agent, the American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, at 6201 15th Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11219, (800) 937-5449, or Cameron Hopewell at the address and phone number above. If your shares are held in a brokerage account, please contact your broker.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

We believe that effective corporate governance is important to our long-term health and our ability to create value for our stockholders. With leadership from our Nominating and Governance Committee, our Board of Directors regularly evaluates regulatory developments and trends in corporate governance to determine whether our policies and practices in this area should be enhanced. The Nominating and Governance Committee also administers an annual self-evaluation process for the Board of Directors and its standing committees. In addition, our directors are encouraged to attend director education programs, which are reimbursed by the Company.

You can access our current corporate charter, Bylaws, Corporate Governance Guidelines, Board committee charters, Code of Ethics and Business Conduct and certain other corporate governance information on our website, www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Director Independence

Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Hininger are the only members of the Board of Directors who currently are employed by the Company and are thus not independent, and as we announced in February 2015, Mr. Ferguson has announced his intention to retire from the Board and will not stand for re-election at the Annual Meeting. The Board has determined that all of our other directors are independent. Accordingly, 9 of our 11 current directors and 8 of our 9 director nominees are independent and our Audit, Risk, Compensation and Nominating and Governance Committees are composed entirely of independent directors. In making its independence determinations, the Board used the standards for director independence set forth in the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) corporate governance listing standards (Section 303A) and, with respect to Audit Committee members, Section 10A(m)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Separation of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

We do not have a formal policy regarding the separation of our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) positions. In general, the Board of Directors believes that the determination depends on the circumstances, including the Board of Directors’ evaluation of the person or persons available to serve in those positions and the needs of the Company at a particular time.

Pursuant to our Bylaws, the Chairman presides over meetings of the Board of Directors and meetings of the stockholders at which he is present and has general oversight responsibility for our business and affairs. The CEO has responsibility for implementation of the policies of the Company, as determined by the Board of Directors, and for the administration of our business affairs. The CEO also has responsibility for presiding over any meeting of the Board of Directors or of the stockholders at which the Chairman is not present.

Since October 2009, the roles of Chairman and CEO have been held separately. John D. Ferguson currently serves as executive Chairman of the Board of Directors and is an employee of the Company, while Damon T. Hininger serves as President and CEO. Prior to October 2009, Mr. Ferguson served as our CEO. Mr. Ferguson has previously announced his intention to retire from the Board and is not standing for re-election at the Annual Meeting. The Board reviewed and discussed the Board leadership structure and the specific role and responsibilities of the Chairman of the Board and in February 2016 appointed Mr. Emkes to serve as Chairman of the Board, effective as of Mr. Ferguson’s retirement at the Annual Meeting.

The Board of Directors believes that the Company’s leadership structure is appropriate. Having Mr. Hininger serve as President and CEO, while Mr. Emkes will serve as independent Chairman, helps us achieve important objectives. Mr. Hininger is positioned to fully focus his energies on implementing our business strategy and administering our day-to-day affairs. Mr. Emkes will be positioned to draw on his relationships with existing Board members and his past experience to effectively discharge the duties of Chairman, while also serving as a resource to Mr. Hininger. The Board of Directors considers many factors when determining how to best select the Chairman, including: familiarity with the Company and its business, proximity in location to the Company’s headquarters, experience as a leader and consensus builder, willingness and availability to dedicate sufficient time to the Company and experience working with other public companies.

Executive Sessions

Executive sessions, or meetings of our non-management directors without management present, are held periodically in order to provide an opportunity for the outside directors to discuss openly any and all matters. During 2015, the outside directors met in executive session two (2) times. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that Executive sessions are called and chaired by an independent director appointed from time to time by the Nominating and Governance Committee. Joseph V. Russell currently serves as the Executive session chair; Charles L. Overby served in such role until Mr. Russell’s appointment in May 2015.

Board of Directors Meetings and Committees

Our Board of Directors is responsible for establishing the Company’s broad corporate policies and strategic objectives, reviewing our overall performance and overseeing management’s performance. Among other things, the Board of Directors selects and evaluates our executive officers, establishes, reviews and approves our corporate objectives and strategies and evaluates and approves major acquisitions and capital commitments.

The Board of Directors currently consists of 11 members, 9 of whom are standing for re-election and are identified, along with their biographical information, under “Proposal 1—Election of Directors.”

The Board of Directors met five times in 2015. Each director attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings of the Board of Directors and of the meetings held by all board committees on which such director served. The Board of Directors has adopted as its policy that directors are strongly encouraged to attend each annual meeting of stockholders. All of the directors attended last year’s annual meeting of stockholders.

Our Board of Directors has five regularly standing committees: the Audit, Compensation, Nominating and Governance, Risk and Executive Committees. The Risk Committee was first established in August 2015. Each committee has a written charter that has been approved by the committee and the Board of Directors and that is reviewed at least annually. The table below shows the current composition of each of our regularly standing Board committees, together with a summary of each committee’s responsibilities and the number of meetings each committee held in 2015. The Board of Directors and its committees also act by unanimous written consent and the Board of Directors appoints and delegates certain duties to special committees of the Board from time to time as permitted by the Bylaws of the Company. A more complete description of the standing committees follows the table.

Committee

Members

Summary of Responsibilities

2015
Meetings
Audit

C. Michael Jacobi (Chair)

Donna M. Alvarado

Anne L. Mariucci

Charles L. Overby*

John R. Prann, Jr.

Responsibilities include oversight of the integrity of our financial statements; and the hiring, qualifications, independence and performance of our independent registered public accountants and our internal audit function.5
Compensation

Joseph V. Russell (Chair)**

John D. Correnti***

Mark A. Emkes

John R. Prann, Jr.

Robert J. Dennis

Responsibilities include setting executive officer compensation and overseeing the evaluation of the executive officers’ performance, and periodically reviewing and approving the Company’s compensation philosophy regarding executive compensation.5

Nominating and

Governance

Charles L. Overby (Chair)

Donna M. Alvarado

Mark A. Emkes

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

Joseph V. Russell**

Responsibilities include identifying and recommending director nominees to the full Board and taking a leadership role in shaping and evaluating the Board’s corporate governance initiatives.4
Risk

Thurgood Marshall, Jr. (Chair)

Donna Alvarado

Anne Mariucci

Charles Overby

Responsibilities include coordinating the Board’s oversight of the Company’s risk assessment and risk management practices and the Company’s legal, regulatory and contract compliance.1
Executive

John D. Ferguson (Chair)**

Robert J. Dennis

Damon T. Hininger

Joseph V. Russell**

When necessary, and subject to authority limitations with respect to significant corporate actions, responsible for acting on behalf of the full Board during intervals between Board meetings.

*No longer a member of the committee as he stepped down following the committee’s November 2015 meeting in connection with his appointment to the Risk Committee.
**Will retire as of the Annual Meeting and will no longer be a member of the committee.
***Former Director; deceased in August 2015 and no longer a member of the committee.

Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee is charged with:

overseeing the integrity of our financial statements;

reviewing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting;

supervising our relationship with our independent registered public accounting firm, including making decisions with respect to the appointment or removal, fees, scope of audit services, approval of audit and non-audit services and annual evaluation of the audit firm’s independence;

monitoring preparation by our management of quarterly and annual financial reports and interim earnings releases and the performance of our internal audit function;

reviewing of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations prior to the filing of our periodic reports with the SEC;

overseeing management’s implementation and maintenance of effective systems of internal accounting and disclosure controls, including review of our internal auditing program;

overseeing and making determinations with respect to our Related Party Transaction policy; and

issuing the Audit Committee Report in this proxy.

The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is independent as defined by the standards of the NYSE and Rule 10A-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Board also has determined that each member is “financially literate” as defined by the rules of the NYSE and that Mr. Jacobi and Mr. Prann each are qualified as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined in Item 407(d) of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The full text of the Audit Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page). The Audit Committee was formerly known as the Audit and Risk Committee. In August 2015, as a result of its regular evaluation of the responsibilities of its committees, our Board amended the responsibilities of the committee in its charter to refine and confirm its leadership role in oversight of audit matters specifically, renamed the committee the Audit Committee to reflect these changes and created a new committee, the Risk Committee, to oversee the coordination of the Board’s oversight of risk assessment and management. The Risk Committee is further discussed below.

Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee approves the compensation of our CEO and other executive officers, including annually reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives relevant to their compensation. The Compensation Committee is responsible for ensuring that our compensation programs are designed to encourage high performance, promote accountability and adherence to Company values and align with the interests of our stockholders. The Compensation Committee responsibilities include administration of cash and equity-based incentive compensation plans and stock ownership guidelines, evaluation of the performance of the executive officers and assessment of the material risks of our compensation programs. The Compensation Committee is also responsible for reviewing, and making recommendations to the Board regarding, the compensation of our Board of Directors.

The Board has determined that each member of the Compensation Committee is independent as defined by the standards of the NYSE. We intend that each member also qualifies as an “outside director” within the meaning of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code and as “non-employee director” within the meaning of the SEC’s Rule 16b-3. The full text of the Compensation Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

The Compensation Committee has retained PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, or PwC, as its independent compensation consultant since 2000, to provide the committee with advice and guidance on the design and market competitiveness of the Company’s executive compensation programs. PwC works directly with the chair of the Compensation Committee and as directed by the chair of the Compensation Committee, with our Chief Executive Officer. In 2015, PwC was retained to provide certain valuation services, for an aggregate amount of fees paid for such services equal to approximately $176,000. PwC was also paid an aggregate amount of approximately $34,000 for consulting with the Compensation Committee on compensation matters. The valuation services were used in connection with the Company’s REIT qualification testing. PwC has annually performed valuation services in anticipation of, and since, our initial conversion to a REIT. The decision to hire PwC for these services was made by management, based on PwC’s experience and familiarity with the Company. Management reviews and obtains approval from the chair of the Compensation Committee prior to engaging PwC for these services. Each year the Compensation Committee reviews the independence of the compensation consultants and other advisors who provide advice to the Compensation Committee, employing the independence factors specified in the NYSE listing standards. In its annual review of the independence of PwC in 2015, the Compensation

Committee reviewed management’s retention of PwC for the other services. The Compensation Committee has determined that PwC is independent within the meaning of the NYSE listing standards, and the work of PwC does not raise any conflicts of interest. In 2015, PwC assisted the Compensation Committee providing the following compensation consulting services:

providing market data regarding peer companies;

advising regarding compensation for our board of directors; and

assistance in preparing our annual proxy statement.

Nominating and Governance Committee

The Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for developing and overseeing the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and a code of conduct applicable to members of the Board and for monitoring the independence of the Board. The Nominating and Governance Committee also determines Board membership qualifications, selects, evaluates and recommends to the Board nominees to fill vacancies as they arise, reviews the performance of the Board and its committees and is responsible for director education. Other responsibilities include oversight of the Board’s self-evaluation process and leading the Board’s executive succession planning efforts. The Board has determined that each member of the Nominating and Governance Committee is independent as defined by the standards of the NYSE. The full text of the Nominating and Governance Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

The Nominating and Governance Committee may utilize a variety of methods for identifying nominees for director. Candidates may come to the attention of the Nominating and Governance Committee through current Board members, stockholders, members of management, director search firms and other persons. A stockholder who wishes to recommend a prospective nominee for the Board should notify our Secretary in writing, along with any supporting material the stockholder considers appropriate, in accordance with the stockholder proposal provisions of our Bylaws. General information concerning the submission of stockholder proposals is provided above under the caption “How and when may I submit a stockholder proposal for the Company’s 2017 Annual Meeting?”. Pursuant to Board policy, there are to be no differences in the manner in which the Committee evaluates candidates based on the source of the recommendation.

The Nominating and Governance Committee is authorized by the Board to identify director candidates, evaluate and consider candidates proposed by any director, member of management or stockholder, develop and implement screening processes it deems necessary and appropriate and recommend for selection by the Board director nominees for each annual meeting of stockholders and, when necessary, vacancies on the Board. The Committee is authorized by the Board to exercise sole authority in retaining any third-party search firm the Committee deems appropriate to identify and assist with the evaluation of director candidates and has utilized that authority in past director searches.

The Nominating and Governance Committee evaluates prospective nominees against the criteria in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which include professional integrity and sound judgment, sufficient time available to devote to Board activities, a general understanding of marketing, finance and other elements relevant to the success of a publicly-traded company in today’s business environment, an understanding of our business and factors such as diversity, age, skills and educational and professional background. With respect to diversity, the Committee considers diversity in terms of age, gender and ethnicity, as well as diversity of skills, expertise and experience, in its deliberations.

The Nominating and Governance Committee may also consider other factors it deems relevant, including the current composition of the Board in terms of independence, expertise, experience and special knowledge required for the effective discharge of Board responsibilities, whether there is a need to fill vacancies or expand or contract the size of the Board, the balance of management and independent directors, the structure, membership and need for expertise on our standing committees and the qualifications of other prospective nominees. Nominees are not discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or any other basis proscribed by law.

With respect to determining whether current directors should stand for re-election, the Nominating and Governance Committee also considers the director’s past attendance at meetings and participation in and contributions to the activities of the Board and the Company. With respect to new candidates for Board service, a full evaluation may also include detailed background checks and in-person and telephonic interviews with the Nominating and Governance Committee and other Board members. The Committee evaluation process culminates with a decision as to whether or not to recommend the prospective nominee to the full Board for appointment and/or nomination.

Risk Committee

The Risk Committee was created in August 2015 after the Board had previously combined the responsibilities of risk oversight with the formerly-named Audit and Risk Committee, now called the Audit Committee. The Risk Committee is charged with coordinating the Board’s oversight of the Company’s risk assessment and risk management practices and the Company’s legal, regulatory (including the special rules applicable to REITs) and contract compliance (particularly contracts with government entities). The Risk Committee is also responsible for monitoring and reviewing public policy developments and other trends facing the Company that could impact the Company’s operation and performance. The Risk Committee further assists the Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibility with respect to organizational ethics and compliance and receives regular reports from the Company’s Corporate Ethics and Compliance Officer, who reports to the Chief Executive Officer and to the chair of the Risk Committee. The full text of the Risk Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Executive Committee

The Executive Committee is charged with acting on behalf of the full Board when necessary and subject to authority limitations with respect to the transaction of routine, administrative matters that occur between regularly scheduled Board meetings. The full text of the Executive Committee charter is available on the Company’s website at www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Limitations on Other Board Service

The Audit Committee charter provides that a member of the Audit Committee may not serve on the audit committee of more than two other public companies without Board approval. Otherwise, we do not believe that our directors should be categorically prohibited from serving on boards and/or board committees of other organizations. However, our Corporate Governance Guidelines instruct the Nominating and Governance Committee and the full Board to take into account the nature of and time involved with respect to a director’s service on other boards as well as other job responsibilities in evaluating the suitability of individual directors and in making its recommendations to our stockholders. Service on boards and/or committees of other organizations must also be consistent with our conflicts of interest policy, as set forth in our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, which, among other things, requires a director to provide notice to the Board of his or her acceptance of a nomination to serve on the board of another public company.

Communications with Directors

Stockholders, employees and other interested parties may communicate with members of our Board of Directors (including specific members of the Board or non-management directors as a group) by writing to CCA, Attention: Secretary, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215. To the extent such communications are received, our Secretary compiles all substantive communications and periodically submits them to the Board, the group of directors or the individual directors to whom they are addressed. Communications that the Secretary would not consider “substantive,” and therefore may exercise discretion in submitting to the addressee, may include junk mail, mass mailings, resumes and job inquiries, surveys, business solicitations, advertisements, frivolous communications and other similarly unsuitable communications.

Communications expressing concerns or complaints relating to accounting, internal controls or auditing matters are handled in accordance with procedures established by the Audit Committee. Under those procedures, concerns that are improperly characterized as having to do with accounting, internal controls or auditing matters or that are frivolous or clearly inconsequential may be addressed by the Secretary without presentation to the Audit Committee. However, in all cases the Secretary maintains a log of correspondence addressed to directors that may be reviewed by any director at his or her request.

Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions

Since the beginning of the last fiscal year, we are aware of no related party transactions between us and any of our directors, executive officers, 5% stockholders or their family members which require disclosure under Item 404 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Pursuant to its written charter, the Audit Committee has adopted a Related Party Transaction Policy that, subject to certain exceptions, requires the Audit Committee (or the chair of the Audit Committee in certain instances) to review and either ratify, approve or disapprove all “Interested Transactions,” which are generally defined to include any transaction, arrangement or relationship or series of similar transactions, arrangements or relationships (including any indebtedness or guarantee of indebtedness) in which:

the aggregate amount involved exceeded, or will or may be expected to exceed, $120,000 in any calendar year;

the Company was, is or will be a participant; and

any Related Party had, has or will have a direct or indirect interest.

For purposes of the policy, a “Related Party” is any:

person who is or was (since the beginning of the last fiscal year for which the Company has filed a Form 10-K and proxy statement, even if they do not presently serve in that role) an executive officer, director or nominee for election as a director;

greater than 5% beneficial owner of the Company’s common stock;

immediate family member of any of the foregoing; or

firm, corporation or other entity in which any of the foregoing persons is employed or is a general partner, managing member or principal or in a similar position or in which such person has a 10% or greater beneficial ownership interest.

In determining whether to approve or ratify an Interested Transaction under the policy, the Audit Committee is to consider all relevant information and facts available to it regarding the Interested Transaction and take into account factors such as the Related Party’s relationship to the Company and interest (direct or indirect) in the transaction, the terms of the transaction and the benefits to the Company of the transaction. No director is to participate in the approval of an Interested Transaction for which he or she is a Related Party or otherwise has a direct or indirect interest.

In addition, the Audit Committee is to review and assess ongoing Interested Transactions, if any, on at least an annual basis to determine whether any such transactions remain appropriate or should be modified or terminated.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

Since 2007, we have maintained stock ownership guidelines (the “Guidelines”) for our executive officers and directors because we believe it is important to align the interests of our management and Board with the interests of our stockholders. Under the Guidelines, our executive officers are expected to own a fixed number of shares of Company common stock equal to three times such executive officer’s base salary in effect as of the date of their hiring or promotion, divided by the Company’s closing common stock price on such date. Our non-executive directors are expected to own a fixed number of shares of Company common stock equal to four times their annual Board retainer (excluding any retainer for chairing or serving on a committee) in effect on March 1, 2007 or on the date of their later initial election or appointment to the Board, divided by the Company’s closing common stock price on such date. Executive officers and directors serving on the Board at the time these Guidelines were adopted were required to achieve these ownership levels by March 1, 2012 and all others have until five years following their initial hiring or promotion as an executive officer, or election or appointment to the Board, as applicable, to satisfy the Guidelines. The Guidelines are further discussed under “Stock Ownership Guidelines” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and the Director Compensation sections of this proxy and are accessible on our website, www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

No Hedging or Pledging Permitted

Our insider trading guidelines include provisions that prohibit members of our Board, executive officers, and other officers and employees from engaging in hedging or pledging transactions involving Company securities. None of the members of our Board or our executive officers are engaged in any hedging or pledging transactions involving Company securities.

Code of Ethics and Business Conduct

All of our directors and employees, including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and principal accounting officer, are subject to our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct. Our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct and related compliance policies are designed to promote an environment in which integrity is valued, business is conducted in a legal and ethical manner and ethics and compliance issues are raised and addressed. Our Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing the Code annually and our Risk Committee is responsible for addressing any violations or waivers involving our executive officers and directors. We intend to post amendments to or waivers from our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct (to the extent applicable to our directors, chief executive officer, principal financial officer or principal accounting officer) on our website. Our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct is accessible on our website, www.cca.com (under the “Corporate Governance” section of the Investors page).

Risk Oversight

As discussed above, in August 2015, as a result of its regular evaluation of the responsibilities of its committees, our Board created the “Risk Committee” which has a leadership role on behalf of the Board in oversight of our risk assessment and risk management practices and assists the Board with oversight of our financial, legal, contractual and regulatory risks and organizational ethics and compliance. The Risk Committee is also charged with oversight of management’s enterprise risk management (“ERM”) program.

Management’s ERM program entails the identification, prioritization and assessment of a broad range of risks (e.g., financial, operational, business, reputational, governance and managerial), and the formulation of plans to manage these risks or mitigate their effects in an integrated effort involving the Board, relevant Board committees, management and other personnel. The ERM program is led by our General Counsel and is a component of management’s strategic planning process and is overseen by the Risk Committee with periodic reports to the full Board.

The full Board maintains an ongoing, direct role in risk oversight through, among other things, regular reports from the Chair of the Risk Committee, regular reports from our Chief Executive Officer on the ERM process and oversight of management’s strategic planning process, which includes an evaluation of opportunities and risks presented by the Company’s current strategies and alternative strategies. The Board also receives regular reports from each of the executives with respect to their areas of managerial responsibility. These reports include information concerning risks and risk mitigation strategies. For example, the Board receives quarterly reports from our Chief Corrections Officer with respect to key areas of operational risk; monitors risks relating to our partnership development efforts through quarterly reports from our Chief Development Officer; and receives regular reports from our General Counsel with respect to legal and compliance risks. In addition, the Board evaluates risk in the context of particular business strategies and transactions. For example, the Board monitors significant capital expenditures through its annual budget review and quarterly capital expenditure reports from management and monitors risk relating to our acquisition and financing activities through in depth reviews of proposed acquisition and financing transactions.

In addition to the Risk Committee, other standing committees of the Board also have responsibility for risk oversight within their areas of oversight. The Audit Committee focuses on financial risk, including fraud risk and risks relating to our internal controls over financial reporting. It receives an annual risk assessment report from the Company’s internal auditors, as well as financial risk assessment information in connection with particular events or transactions. The Nominating and Governance Committee addresses certain governance-related risks, such as risks related to Board and executive management succession planning. As discussed in detail below, the Compensation Committee addresses risks relating to our executive compensation strategies. The full Board receives regular reports from the chairs of these committees and receives reports and other meeting materials provided to each of the committees.

Compensation Risk Assessment

In setting compensation, our Compensation Committee considers the achievement of CCA’s goals that may be inherent in the compensation program as well as the risks to CCA’s stockholders. Although a significant portion of our executives’ compensation is performance-based and “at-risk,” the Compensation Committee believes our executive compensation plans are appropriately structured and do not pose a material risk to CCA. The Compensation Committee considered the following elements of our executive compensation plans and policies when evaluating whether such plans and policies encourage our executives to take unreasonable risks:

We set performance goals that we believe are reasonable, but uncertain, in light of past performance and current market and economic conditions.

We use restricted stock units for equity awards because restricted stock units retain value even in a depressed market.

The performance-based vesting over multiple years for our long-term incentive awards promotes the alignment of our executives’ interests with those of our stockholders for the long-term performance of CCA.

Assuming achievement of at least a minimum level of performance, payouts under our performance-based plans result in some compensation at levels below full target achievement, rather than an “all-or-nothing” approach.

Our executive stock ownership policy requires our executives to hold certain levels of CCA stock, which aligns an appropriate portion of their personal wealth to the long-term performance of CCA.

PROPOSAL 1 - ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The current term of office of each of our directors expires at the Annual Meeting. Mr. Correnti passed away in August 2015. We currently have 11 directors, with 9 current members of the Board of Directors standing for re-election at the Annual Meeting. Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Russell will be retiring as of the Annual Meeting and are not standing for re-election. The Board of Directors has reduced the authorized number of directors from 11 to 9 members effective as of the Annual Meeting.

Based on the recommendation of the Nominating and Governance Committee, the Board of Directors has nominated the following 9 nominees, all of whom are currently serving as directors, for re-election for a new term to serve until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors are duly elected and qualified. We expect each of the 9 nominees to serve if elected. If any of them becomes unavailable to serve as a director, the Board may designate a substitute nominee. In that case, the persons named as proxies will vote for the substitute nominee designated by the Board.

The general criteria considered by the Nominating and Governance Committee with respect to director nominees are discussed on page 9 of this Proxy Statement under the heading “Nominating and Governance Committee.” Based on evaluation of those criteria, the Nominating and Governance Committee and the Board believe that each of the nominees contributes relevant skills, expertise and experience to the Board and that the group of nominees collectively has the skills, expertise, experience, independence and other attributes necessary to discharge effectively the Board’s oversight responsibilities on behalf of the Company’s stockholders.

Nominees Standing for Election

Information regarding each of the nominees for director, including particular qualifications considered for each nominee, is set forth below. Directors’ ages are given as of the date of this Proxy Statement.

DAMON T. HININGERDirector since 2009

Mr. Hininger, age 46, has served as a director and our President and Chief Executive Officer since October 2009. From July 2008 until October 2009, Mr. Hininger served as our President and Chief Operating Officer. From 2007 until July 2008, Mr. Hininger served as our Senior Vice President, Federal and Local Customer Relations. Mr. Hininger joined the Company in 1992 and held several positions, including Vice President, Business Analysis and Vice President, Federal Customer Relations before being promoted to Senior Vice President. Mr. Hininger earned a bachelor’s degree from Kansas State University and an M.B.A. from the Jack Massey School of Business at Belmont University. Mr. Hininger also serves on the board of directors with the United Way of Metropolitan Nashville.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Hininger to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his current service as our President and Chief Executive Officer and his comprehensive knowledge of the Company, its business, operations and management team through his current position and past roles with the Company, including roles at the facility operations level and as Chief Operations Officer and Senior Vice President, Federal and Local Customer Relations.

DONNA M. ALVARADODirector since 2003

Ms. Alvarado, age 67, has served as a director and member of our Audit Committee since December 2003, a member of our Risk Committee since its formation in August 2015, a member of the Nominating and Governance Committee since December 2014 and is appointed to serve as Chair of the Compensation Committee following the Annual Meeting. Ms. Alvarado is the founder and current president of Aguila International, an international business-consulting firm that specializes in human resources and leadership development. She serves as a director and member of the audit and compensation committees of CSX Corporation, a publicly-traded provider of rail and other transportation services, and as a director and chair of the nominating and corporate governance committee and a member of the audit and risk committee of Park National Corporation, a publicly-held bank holding company. Ms. Alvarado has served as a member and as chair of the Ohio Board of Regents and has held senior management positions in government, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense with the U.S. Department of Defense and Director of ACTION, the federal domestic volunteer agency. Ms. Alvarado earned both a master’s and a bachelor’s degree in Spanish from Ohio State University, completed doctoral coursework in Latin American Literature at the University of Oklahoma and earned a postgraduate certificate in Financial Management from the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.

In making the decision to nominate Ms. Alvarado to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, her understanding of government through her public sector experience; her experience as a public company director and member of audit, compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees; her human resources and leadership development expertise; her civic and community involvement; and her contribution to the Board’s gender and cultural diversity.

ROBERT J. DENNISDirector since 2013

Mr. Dennis, age 62, was appointed to the Board of Directors in February 2013 and is a member of our Compensation and Executive Committees. Mr. Dennis is the chairman, president and chief executive officer of Genesco Inc., a diversified retailer of footwear, headwear, sports apparel and accessories, where he has served in an executive capacity since 2004. A 27-year retail veteran, Mr. Dennis has held senior positions with Hat World Corporation and Asbury Automotive and was a partner and leader of the North American Retail Practice with McKinsey & Company, an international consulting firm. Mr. Dennis holds a master of business administration degree, with distinction, from the Harvard Business School, with a focus on consumer marketing, and bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Mr. Dennis is a member of the Board of Directors and a member of the Governance Committee of HCA Holdings, Inc., a leading health care services company that operates hospitals and surgery centers in the United States and London, England. Previously, he served as a member of the board of directors of Teavana Holdings, Inc., a publicly traded purveyor of high quality teas and tea products, until its acquisition by Starbucks in December 2012. He serves on the board of directors of the United Way of Metropolitan Nashville, the Nashville Symphony, and serves on the Board of Visitors at Vanderbilt University’s Owen School of Management.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Dennis to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his leadership experience as chief executive officer of a large public company; his public company director experience; his demonstrated business acumen and his understanding of corporate finance and business development matters; and his civic and community involvement.

MARK A. EMKESDirector since 2014

Mr. Emkes, age 63, was appointed to the Board of Directors in August 2014 and is a member of our Compensation Committee and our Nominating and Governance Committee and has been appointed to serve as our independent Chairman of the Board effective as of the 2016 Annual Meeting. For more than five years and until his retirement effective on February 28, 2010, Mr. Emkes was the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Bridgestone Americas, Inc. and Bridgestone Americas Holdings, Inc., the world’s largest tire and rubber company. He was also President of Bridgestone Americas, Inc. from January 2009 until his retirement. Mr. Emkes served as a director of Bridgestone Corporation from April 1, 2004 through February 28, 2010. From 2011 until 2013, Mr. Emkes served as the State of Tennessee’s Commissioner of Finance and Administration, a state-level cabinet position. Mr. Emkes holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from Indiana’s DePauw University and a master of business administration degree from the Thunderbird School of Global Management, located in Glendale, Arizona.

Mr. Emkes is on the Board of Directors of: (i) Greif, Inc. (since February 2008), where he is a member of the compensation committee, (ii) First Horizon National Corporation (since October 2008), where he is the chairman of the audit committee, and (iii) Clarcor, Inc. (since June 2010), where he is a member of the compensation and director affairs/corporate governance committees. Mr. Emkes has served for the following charitable organizations: as President of the Middle Tennessee Council of the Boy Scouts of America, on the Board of Directors of the Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee, on the Advisory Board of Habitat for Humanity, Nashville Chapter, as a member of CEO’s Against Cancer, Tennessee Chapter, and as Chairman of Nashville’s 2010 Heart Walk. Mr. Emkes was the 2011 recipient of the Jennings A. Jones Champion of Free Enterprise Award and in October 2012 was inducted into the Nashville Business Hall of Fame.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Emkes to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his leadership experience in various management positions, including the chief executive officer and chairman, of an international company; his demonstrated business acumen and his understanding of corporate finance and business development matters; and his civic and community involvement.

C. MICHAEL JACOBIDirector since 2000

Mr. Jacobi, age 74, has served as a director and as Chair of the Audit Committee since December 2000. Mr. Jacobi is the owner and president of Stable House, LLC, a private company engaged in residential real estate development. From June 2001 through May 2005, Mr. Jacobi served as the president and chief executive officer and a director of Katy Industries, Inc., a publicly-traded diversified manufacturing company. He is chairman of the board of Sturm, Ruger and Company, Inc., a publicly-traded maker of firearms, a director of Webster Financial Corporation, a publicly-traded banking and financial services company, a director and member of the audit committee of Kohlberg Capital Corporation, a publicly-traded business development company specializing in term loans, mezzanine investments and selected equity positions in middle market companies and a director and member of the audit committee of Performance Sports Group Ltd., a publicly-traded sports equipment company. Mr. Jacobi is a certified public accountant and holds a B.S. degree from the University of Connecticut.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Jacobi to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his leadership experience as chief executive officer and chief financial officer of a public company; his extensive experience as a public company director and audit committee member and chairman; and his financial and accounting experience and expertise.

ANNE L. MARIUCCIDirector since 2011

Ms. Mariucci, age 58, has served as a director since December 2011 and as a member of our Audit Committee since May 2012 and a member of our Risk Committee since its formation in August 2015. Ms. Mariucci is a private investor who, prior to 2003, served in a variety of senior management capacities with Del Webb Corporation and as Senior Vice President of Strategy for Pulte Homes, Inc., following its acquisition of Del Webb. Ms. Mariucci received her undergraduate degree in accounting and finance from the University of Arizona and completed the corporate finance program at the Stanford University Graduate School of Business. She serves as a director of Taylor Morrison Home Corp., where she serves on the Audit Committee, Southwest Gas Company, where she serves on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and is the chair of the Pension Plan Investment Committee, Banner Health, where she serves as a member of the Audit and Compensation Committees, Arizona State University Foundation and the Fresh Start Women’s Foundation. She is a past director of the Arizona State Retirement System, Scottsdale Healthcare and Action Performance Companies, as well as a past Trustee of the Urban Land Institute. She also served on the Arizona Board of Regents.

In making the decision to nominate Ms. Mariucci to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, her public company executive leadership experience; her understanding of and experience with the State of Arizona, a state where a significant portion of our operations is located; her background in accounting and corporate finance; her experience and knowledge with real estate; her experience as a public company director and member of audit and compensation committees; her civic and community involvement; and her contribution to the Board’s gender diversity.

THURGOOD MARSHALL, JR.Director since 2002

Mr. Marshall, age 59, has served as a director and member of the Nominating and Governance Committee since December 2002 and as the Chair of the Risk Committee since its formation in August 2015. Mr. Marshall is a partner in the law firm of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP in Washington D.C., and a principal in Morgan Lewis Consulting Group LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP that assists business clients with communications, political and legal strategies. Mr. Marshall is a member of the board of directors of Genesco Inc., a diversified retailer of footwear, headwear, sports apparel and accessories. He also serves on the boards of the Ford Foundation and the Supreme Court Historical Society. He serves on the American Bar Association Election Law Committee and the American Bar Association Law and National Security Committee, and he served on the Ethics Oversight Committee of the United States Olympic Committee. Mr. Marshall, the son of the historic Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, has held appointments in each branch of the federal government, including Cabinet Secretary to President Clinton and Director of Legislative Affairs and Deputy Counsel to Vice President Al Gore. Mr. Marshall was confirmed by the United States Senate to serve on the Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service in 2006 and served as Chairman prior to completing his service in 2013. Mr. Marshall earned a B.A. in 1978 and a J.D. in 1981 from the University of Virginia, after which he clerked for United States District Judge Barrington D. Parker.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Marshall to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his understanding of politics and the public sector through his varied government service and consulting work; his understanding of organizational governance and oversight through his service as a director in the public, non-profit and for-profit sectors; his understanding of legal, regulatory and compliance issues through his education and experience as a lawyer; and his contribution to the Board’s cultural diversity.

CHARLES L. OVERBYDirector since 2001

Mr. Overby, age 69, has served as a director since December 2001. Mr. Overby served as a member of the Audit Committee from February 2002 through November 2015, a member of our Risk Committee since its formation in August 2015 and as the Chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee since the committee was established in December 2002. From 1997 through 2011, Mr. Overby served as the chairman and chief executive officer of The Freedom Forum, an independent, non-partisan foundation dedicated to the First Amendment and media issues, as well as chief executive officer of its affiliates, The Diversity Institute and the Newseum, a museum about news and history in Washington, D.C. Mr. Overby is a former Pulitzer Prize-winning editor in Jackson, Mississippi. He worked 16 years for Gannett Co., the nation’s largest newspaper company, in various capacities, including as reporter, editor and corporate executive. He was vice president for news and communications for Gannett and served on the management committees of Gannett and USA TODAY. Mr. Overby currently serves on the board of the Andrew Jackson Foundation.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Overby to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his executive leadership experience and understanding of corporate governance as chief executive of several non-profit organizations; his understanding of media and public relations through his career as a journalist, print media executive and executive with other media related organizations; his political experience; and his civic and community involvement and leadership.

JOHN R. PRANN, JR.Director since 2000

Mr. Prann, age 65, has served as a director and member of the Compensation Committee since December 2000 and member of the Audit Committee since December 2014. Mr. Prann’s business experience includes service as the president and chief executive officer of Katy Industries, Inc., as a partner with the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche and as a director of several private companies. Mr. Prann earned a B.A. in Biology from the University of California, Riverside and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago.

In making the decision to nominate Mr. Prann to serve as a director, the Nominating and Governance Committee considered, in addition to the criteria referred to above, his executive leadership experience as president and chief executive of a public company and his understanding of accounting and finance issues through his education and career.

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote “FOR” each of the 911 nominees.


PROPOSAL 2 - RATIFICATION̶  NON-BINDING RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

TheOur Audit Committee has appointed Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016.2019. Services provided to the Company and its subsidiaries by Ernst & Young LLP in fiscal 20152018 are described below under “Audit Matters.”

Representatives of Ernst & Young LLP will be present at the Annual Meeting. They will have the opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so and we expect that they will be available to respond to questions.

Ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the votes cast by the holders of the shares of common stock votingpresent in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting.Meeting and entitled to vote. If you abstain from voting on this proposal, your abstention will have the same effect as a vote against the proposal. If the Company’s stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP, theour Audit Committee will reconsider the appointment and may affirm the appointment or retain another independent accounting firm. Iffirm, in its sole discretion. Even if the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP is ratified, theour Audit Committee may in the future replace Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm at any time if it is determineddetermines that it isa change would be in the Company’sour best interest to do so.interest.

TheOur Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote “FOR” the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm of the Company for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016.

2019.


AUDIT MATTERSMATTERS

Audit and Non-Audit Fees

The following table presents fees for audit, audit-related, tax and other services rendered by the Company’s principal independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, for the years ended December 31, 20152018 and 2014.2017:

 

Fees

  2015   2014 

Audit Fees(1)

  $1,303,442    $1,288,906  

Audit-Related Fees(2)

   589,154     —   

Tax Fees(3)

   313,948     776,895  

All Other Fees(4)

   1,995     1,715  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $2,208,539    $2,067,516  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fees

 

2018

 

 

2017

 

Audit Fees (1)

 

$

1,243,318

 

 

$

1,320,932

 

Audit-Related Fees (2)

 

 

362,759

 

 

 

310,126

 

Tax Fees (3)

 

 

319,987

 

 

 

289,499

 

All Other Fees (4)

 

 

2,000

 

 

 

1,995

 

Total

 

$

1,928,064

 

 

$

1,922,552

 

 

(1)

(1)

Audit fees for 20152018 and 20142017 include fees associated with the audit of our consolidated financial statements, the audit of our internal control over financial reporting, reviews of our quarterly financial statements and assistance with filing certainprospectus supplements to our shelf registration statements.statement.

(2)

Audit-Related Fees

(2)

Audit-related fees in 20152018 and 2017 include due diligence and accounting consultations related primarily to our acquisition of Avalon Correctional Services, Inc.acquisitions completed in 2018 and analysis of2017 and other prospective acquisitions.

(3)

(3)

Tax fees for 20152018 and 20142017 were for services consisting primarily of federal and state tax planning, including the Company’sCompanyʼs activities relating to being taxed as a REIT. Tax fees for 2015 also include federal and state tax consulting in connection with our acquisition of Avalon Correctional Services, Inc. and analysis of other prospective acquisitions.

(4)

(4)

All other fees for 20152018 and 20142017 consist of access fees to EY Online, an on-lineonline information and communication tool available to Ernst & Young audit clients.

Pre-Approval of Audit and Non-Audit Fees

Consistent with Section 202 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and SEC rules regarding auditor independence, our Audit Committee pre-approves all audit and non-audit services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm. In 20152018 and 2014, the2017, our Audit Committee approvedpre-approved all feesamounts disclosed under “audit,” “tax,“audit-related,“audit-related”“tax” and “all other” fees by Ernst & Young, LLP in accordance with applicable rules.

TheOur Audit Committee’s Auditor Independence Policy prohibits our independent registered public accounting firm from performing certain non-audit services and any services that have not been approved by theour Audit Committee in accordance with the policy and the Section 202 rules. The policy establishes procedures to ensure that proposed services are brought before theour Audit Committee for consideration and, if determined by theour Audit Committee to be consistent with the auditor’s independence, approved prior to initiation, and to ensure that theour Audit Committee has adequate information to assess the types of services being performed and fee amounts on an ongoing basis. TheOur Audit Committee has delegated to its Chair, Mr. Jacobi,Prann, the authority to pre-approve services between meetings when necessary, provided that the full Audit Committee is apprised of the services approved at its next regularly scheduled meeting.


Report of the AuditAudit Committee

The following Report of the Audit Committee does not constitute soliciting material and should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any other Company filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent the Company specifically incorporates this Report by reference therein.

Oversight of Financial Reporting

As part of its oversight of our financial statements, theour Audit Committee reviews and discusses with both management and our independent registered public accounting firm all annual and quarterly financial statements prior to their issuance. With respect to the 20152018 fiscal year, management advised the Audit Committee that each set of financial statements reviewed had been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and reviewed significant accounting and disclosure issues with theour Audit Committee. These reviews included discussion with the independent registered public accounting firm of matters required to be discussed pursuant toAuditing Standard No. 161301 (Communications with Audit Committees), as amended, including the quality of our accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments and the clarity of disclosures in the financial statements. TheOur Audit Committee also received the written disclosures and a letter from Ernst & Young LLP required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding its communications with theour Audit Committee concerning independence, and has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP its independence.

Also with respect to fiscal 2015, the2018, our Audit Committee received periodic updates on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting provided by management, the independent registered public accounting firm and the internal auditors at each regularly scheduled Audit Committee meeting and provided oversight during the process. At the conclusion of the process, management provided theour Audit Committee with, and theour Audit Committee reviewed a report on, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. TheOur Audit Committee also reviewed Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and Ernst & Young LLP’s Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.2018.

Taking all of these reviews and discussions into account, the undersigned Committee members recommended to theour Board of Directors that theour Board approve the inclusion of our audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015,2018 for filing with the SEC.

Submitted by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors:Committee:

C. Michael Jacobi,John R. Prann, Jr., Chair

Donna M. Alvarado

Anne L. Mariucci

John R. Prann, Jr.

Devin I. Murphy


PROPOSAL 3 - ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE

COMPENSATION OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The Company seeks your non-binding advisory vote and asks that you support the compensation of our Named Executive Officers as disclosed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section (“CD(the “CD&A”) and the accompanying tables contained in this Proxy Statement. OurAt our 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, our stockholders indicated on an advisory basis their preference that advisory votes to approve the compensation of our Named Executive Officers occur every year. Taking into account the non-binding advisory input of our stockholders and other relevant factors, our Board of Directors has determined to hold this advisory vote every year. The affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote is required to approve the non-binding advisory vote of compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers. If you abstain from voting on this proposal, your abstention will have the same effect as a vote against the proposal.

Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding on theour Compensation Committee or the Company.Committee. However, theour Compensation Committee will review the voting results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation for our Named Executive Officers. We urge you to read the CD&A, which begins on page 2428 of this Proxy Statement, and any other sections of this Proxy Statement forthat provide additional details on our executive compensation, including our compensation philosophy and objectives and the 20152018 compensation of our Named Executive Officers.

As described in detail in the CD&A, our executive compensation programs are designed to ensure that our executive officers are rewarded appropriately for their contributions to us, and that our overall compensation strategy supports the objectives and values of our organization, as well as stockholder interests. Our programs are designed to attract and maintainretain executive leadership who will execute our business strategy, uphold our values and deliver results and long-term value to our stockholders. Our goal is to have a substantial portion of executive compensation contingent upon our performance.

While we experienced a decline in our stock price in 2015 along with other companies in our industry, we continued to have strong operational results in 2015.

In our third year operating as a REIT, weincreased our regular aggregate dividends per share in 2015 to $2.16 from $2.04 per share in 2014.

Our normalized Funds From Operations(“FFO”) per diluted share increased to $2.69 in 2015 from $2.65 in 2014.

We also achievedgrowth in our total revenue and net income, due to successful operations, acquisitions, expansion of corrections capabilities and continued operation as a REIT.

Ourstock price decreased from $36.34 to $26.49 in 2015 resulting in a one-year, three-year and five-year total stockholder return (“TSR”) of -21.9%, 2.0% and 8.9%, respectively, ranking in the 30th, 24th and 35th percentile, respectively, among our peer group for these periods. Our stock price was negatively impacted in part by decreased California inmate population due to regulatory changes and as well as the increased interest rate environment that negatively impacted many REIT stocks.

We alsocompleted several significant transactions and milestones that we believe position us well to execute our business strategies, including the following:

Completed construction of the 2,552-bed Trousdale Turner Correctional Center and successfully prepared the new facility for the intake of inmates in the first quarter of 2016.

Completed the offering of $250.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.0% senior notes due 2022, thereby reducing our exposure to variable rate debt.

Completed the acquisition of Avalon Correctional Services, Inc., a privately held community corrections company that operates 11 community corrections facilities with approximately 3,000 beds in Oklahoma, Texas and Wyoming.

Announced in December 2015, an award from the Arizona Department of Corrections to house up to an additional 1,000 medium-security inmates at our Red Rock Correctional Center in Arizona.

Our compensation reflected our performance and reasonable market competitive practices:

We employnormalized FFO as the primary performance metric by which annual incentive cash compensation may be earned, once we achieved positive adjusted earnings per share (“Adjusted EPS”).

We achieved positive Adjusted EPS of $1.93 and normalized FFO per share of $2.69, which, pursuant to the pre-established formula, yielded anannual cash incentive payout of 51% of actual salary.

Target bonus opportunity under our 2015 annual cash incentive plan is75% of salary for all executives,including our CEO.

We continuedperformance-based RSUs in 2015. Vesting of RSUs granted in 2015 is based on our achievement of a targeted normalized FFO per share, with 1/3rd of the granted shares vesting if we achieve the normalized FFO per share goal for that year. If the goal is not achieved for the year, vesting will not occur for that 1/3rd tranche and will be forfeited. The normalized FFO goals are based on pre-established compounded normalized FFO growth rates.

Ournormalized FFO per share growth resulted infull vesting of the tranches of the performance shares granted in 2015 and 2014 that could vest based on our 2015 normalized FFO performance.

Our equity grants in 2015 wereexclusively performance-based RSUs. We did not grant any options or time-based RSUs to our executive officers.

Ourtotal cash compensation and total direct compensation are generallyat or below market median.

The Compensation Committee continually reviews the compensation programs for our Named Executive Officers to ensure our programs achieve the desired goals of aligning our executive compensation structure with our stockholders’ interests and current market practices. TheOur Compensation Committee also has engaged PwC from time to time as an independent compensation consultant PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, to assist it in reviewing and assessing, as well as providing advice and guidance on the Company’sdesign and market competitiveness of, our compensation strategies and plans.

We believe that our executive compensation programs are structured in the best manner possible to supportalign the interests of our company andmanagement team with those of our stockholders in the management of our business, objectives.the pursuit of our strategic objectives and the creation of long-term value.

Stockholders are being asked to vote on the adoption of the following resolution:

RESOLVED: That the stockholders of Corrections Corporation of AmericaCoreCivic, Inc. approve the compensation of the Company’s Named Executive Officers, as described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section and related compensation tables, notes and narrative in the Proxy Statement for the Company’s 20162019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

TheOur Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote “FOR” the approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation of our Named Executive Officers.


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The following table sets forth our executive officers as of March 14, 2016:April 4, 2019:

 

Damon T. Hininger

Chief Executive Officer and President, Director

David M. Garfinkle

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Harley G. Lappin

Patrick D. Swindle

Executive Vice President and Chief Corrections Officer

Anthony L. Grande

Executive Vice President and Chief Development Officer

Steven E. Groom

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

Executive Vice President and General Counsel
Lucibeth Mayberry

Executive Vice President, Real Estate

Kim M. White

Executive Vice President, Human Resources

John D. Ferguson

Cole G. Carter

Executive Chairman of the Board, Director

Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary

Set forth below are the biographies of each of our current executive officers, except for Mr. Hininger, whose biography is set forth under “Proposal 1 – Election of Directors.”

David M. Garfinkle, age 48,51, has served as the Company’sour Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since May 1, 2014. HeMr. Garfinkle served as the Company’s Vice President of Finance and Controller from February 2001 to May 1, 2014. From 1996 to 2001, Mr. Garfinkle served as Vice President and Controller for Bradley Real Estate, Inc., a publicly traded real estate investment trust. Prior to joining Bradley Real Estate, Inc., Mr. Garfinkle was a Senior Manager at KPMG Peat Marwick, LLP. Mr. Garfinkle is a Certified Public Accountant and graduated summa cum laude withholds a bachelor ofbachelor’s degree in business administration from St. Bonaventure University.

Harley G. LappinPatrick D. Swindle, age 60,43, has served as anour Executive Vice President and our Chief Corrections Officer since June 2011.January 2018. From October 2016 to January 2018, Mr. Swindle served as our Senior Vice President, Operations. From April 2014 to October 2016, Mr. Swindle served as our Vice President, Treasury and Strategic Development. From August 2013 to April 2014, Mr. Swindle served as our Vice President, Strategic Development. From July 2009 to August 2013, Mr. Swindle served as our Vice President and Treasurer. Mr. Swindle joined the Company in 2007 as Managing Director, Treasury. Prior to joining the Company, he spent 10 years in equity research in the equity capital markets divisions of SunTrust Equitable Securities, Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. and since 2003,Avondale Partners, LLC. During his time as an equity analyst, Mr. Lappin served as the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), the nation’s largest correctional system, with oversightSwindle focused his research on outsourced business services, government and management responsibility for 116 federal prisons, 14 large, private contract facilities and more than 250 contracts for community correctional facilities, in total comprising more than 215,000 inmates managed by 38,000 employees. Previously, Mr. Lappin served inhealthcare industries, including partnership corrections. He holds a variety of other roles with the Bureau of Prisons beginning in 1985, including Regional Director, Warden of the United States Penitentiary in Indiana, and Warden of the Federal Correctional Institution in North Carolina, among other positions. Mr. Lappin has a master’sbachelor’s degree in criminal justicefinance from Kent State University and an undergraduate degree from IndianaWestern Kentucky University. Mr. Lappin serves on the boards of Thistle Farms, Inc. and Court Appointed Special Advocates, both non-profit organizations.

Anthony L. Grande, age 46,49, has served as anour Executive Vice President and our Chief Development Officer since July 2008. From September 2007 to July 2008, Mr. Grande served as our Senior Vice President, State Customer Relations. Mr. Grande joined CCAthe Company in 2003 to serve as Vice President, of State Customer Relations. Prior to joining CCA,the Company, Mr. Grande served as the Commissioner of Economic and Community Development for the State of Tennessee. Mr. Grande earned his Masters of Education at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee and his Bachelor of Artsholds a bachelor’s degree from The American University and a master’s degree in Washington, D.C.education from Vanderbilt University.

Steven E. GroomLucibeth N. Mayberry, age 64,47, has served as an Executive Vice President and General Counsel since April 2010. From March 2001 to April 2010, Mr. Groom served as our Vice President and Deputy General Counsel with responsibility for litigation and risk management. Previously, Mr. Groom was a partner in the law firm of Stites & Harbison, PLLC in Nashville and served in managing attorney and general counsel roles for SunTrust Bank, Inc. Mr. Groom earned a bachelor’s degree from Lipscomb University and his law degree from the University of Memphis, where he was a member of the Law Review. Mr. Groom serves on the Board of Visitors of Lipscomb University’s College of Business and the Board of Advisors of the University’s Institute for Conflict Management. Mr. Groom has informed the Company that he intends to retire from his position as Executive Vice President and General Counsel in 2016.

Lucibeth Mayberry, age 44, has served as Executive Vice President, Real Estate since May 2015. From November 2013 to May 2015, Ms. Mayberry served as our Senior Vice President, Real Estate. From August 2008 to November 2013, Ms. Mayberry served as our Vice President, Deputy Chief Development Officer. From March 2006 to August 2008, Ms. Mayberry served as our Vice President, Research, Contract and Proposals. Ms. Mayberry joined CCACoreCivic in May 2003 as Senior Director, State Partnership Relations, and was promoted to Managing Director, State Partnership Relations in 2004. Before joining CCA,CoreCivic, Ms. Mayberry served as a Senior Associate of the Taxation and Estate Planning Practice Group at the Nashville-based law firm Stokes, Bartholomew, Evans and Petree. SheMs. Mayberry holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Tennessee, a juris doctor from Vanderbilt University, and a Mastermaster of Lawslaws degree in Taxationtaxation from the University of Florida.


Kim M. White, age 55,58, has served as our Executive Vice President, Human Resources since May 2015. From November 2013 to May 2015, Ms. White served as our Senior Vice President, Human Resources. From March 2013 to November 2013, Ms. White served as our Vice President, Correctional Programs, and from August 2012 to March 2013, Ms. White served as Managing Director, Inmate Programs. Prior to joining CCA,CoreCivic, Ms. White served 26 years with the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”)BOP in a wide variety of operational roles in the areas of Institutional Operations, Staffing and Inmate Programs, and more recently, prior to her departure in 2012, as the Assistant Director, Human Resource

Management Division, where she had oversight for the hiring, training and retention of the Bureau’sBOP’s 38,000 employees. In 2007, Ms. White received the Presidential Rank Award of Meritorious Executive for her leadership with the BOP. Ms. White holds a bachelor’s degree in corrections and criminal justice and a master’s degree in correctionalcorrections, criminology and juvenile justice both from Kent State University. She has also completed Harvard University’s Executive Education Program for senior managers in government.

John FergusonCole G. Carter, age 70,50, has served as a directorour Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary since August 2000 and also serves as executive Chairman of our Board and chairman of our Executive Committee.July 2018. From July 2006 to July 2018, Mr. Ferguson formerlyCarter served as Associate General Counsel. Mr. Carter joined CoreCivic in 1992 as an academic instructor at Metro-Davidson County Detention Facility. Mr. Carter was promoted to manager of Educational Services at the Facility Support Center in May 1996, where Mr. Carter also served as director of Educational Services and joined our Chief Executive Officer from August 2000 to October 2009 and as our President from August 2000 until July 2008. Mr. Ferguson’s careerLegal Department in business and government includes service as the Commissioner of Finance for the State of Tennessee and as the chairman and chief executive officer of Community Bancshares, Inc., the parent corporation of The Community Bank of Germantown (Tennessee), as well as service on the State of Tennessee Board of Education and the Governor’s Commission on Practical Government for the State of Tennessee. Mr. Ferguson2006. Since 2016, he has served as president of the CoreCivic Cares Fund, which provides short-term assistance to CoreCivic employees who are undergoing financial hardship. Mr. Carter holds a director of various charitable and civic organizations, including the Boy Scouts of America -bachelor’s degree from Tennessee State University, a master’s degree from Middle Tennessee Council, the Nashville Public Education Foundation and the Tennessee Performing Arts Center. Mr. Ferguson graduated from Mississippi State University, in 1967. Mr. Ferguson will be resigning his position as executive Chairmanand a juris doctor from Nashville School of our Board, effective as of the Annual Meeting.

Law.


EXECUTIVE AND DIRECTORDIRECTOR COMPENSATION

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

This section of the Proxy Statement discusses the philosophy, objectives and elements of our executive compensation programs and the compensation awarded to our named executive officers, or NEOs,Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”), consisting of our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and our next three highest paid executives in 2015.2018. This information should be read in conjunction with the Summary Compensation Table and the related tables and narratives that follow in this Proxy Statement. Based on SEC proxy disclosure rules, the following individuals were our NEOs for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015:2018:

 

Damon T. Hininger

Chief Executive Officer and President

David M. Garfinkle

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Harley G. Lappin

Patrick D. Swindle

Executive Vice President and Chief Corrections Officer

Anthony L. Grande

Executive Vice President and Chief Development Officer

Steven E. Groom

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

Executive Vice President, and General CounselReal Estate

 

Executive Summary

Corrections Corporation of AmericaExecutive Summary

Our Company and Strategy

CoreCivic is a self-managed, fully integrated equity REIT that is the nation’s largest owner of privatizedpartnership correctional, detention, and detention facilities andresidential reentry facilities. We are one of the largest prison operators in the United States. States, and we believe we are the largest private owner of real estate used by United States government agencies. Through three segments, CoreCivic Safety, CoreCivic Community and CoreCivic Properties, we provide a broad range of solutions to government partners that serve the public good through corrections and detention management, a growing network of residential reentry centers to help address Americaʼs recidivism crisis, and government real estate solutions.

The fundamental objectiveskeystone of our compensation policies are to attract and retain executive leadership that will execute our business strategy uphold our values, deliver strong results and createis creating long-term value for our stockholders.

Increased Quarterly Dividendsstockholders by pursuing avenues to profitably grow our primary CoreCivic Safety correctional and Returndetention business while diversifying our revenues and cash flows by prudently expanding our CoreCivic Community and CoreCivic Properties businesses.

CoreCivic Safety pursues avenues to Our Stockholders.CCA began operatingprofitably grow by improving performance under contracts with our existing government partners to maintain high renewal rates, marketing available facility capacity to existing and new government partners and providing new facility capacity as appropriate to meet specific partner needs.

CoreCivic Community, the second largest community corrections provider in the United States, with a real estate investment trust, ornetwork of 26 residential reentry centers with a REIT,design capacity of approximately 5,000 beds, pursues opportunities to acquire residential reentry centers that will further expand the network of reentry assets we own and reentry services we provide to existing and new government partners.

CoreCivic Properties, which offers government partners and providers an attractive portfolio of facilities that can be leased for federal income tax purposes effective January 1, 2013delivering mission-critical government services, not only supports CoreCivic Safety and inCoreCivic Community by marketing our third full year as a REIT our regular aggregate quarterly dividends per share in 2015 increased 5.9%available facilities for lease (as an alternative to $2.16 in 2015 from $2.04 in 2014.

Solid Operationalcontracting for “turn-key” correctional, detention and Financial Results for 2015. Dueresidential reentry services), but pursues opportunities to expansion of our community-based corrections capabilities through acquisitionsacquire existing government-leased assets and our ability to create unique solutionsdevelop, build and lease new assets to our government partners’ challenges, we experienced meaningfulpartners.

2018 Company Performance Highlights

Facing a challenging operating environment, which included budgetary constraints and political transitions impacting many of our government partners, our management team remained focused on our operational and


financial performance while continuing our progress in executing our long-term growth and diversification strategy. Highlights from 2018 include:

Our full year performance met or exceeded our 2018 financial guidance, as set forth in our net income, earnings per share (“EPS”)quarterly earning’s press release dated February 14, 2018, for Adjusted EBITDA, Adjusted EPS and dividends, while normalized Funds From Operations (“FFO”)Normalized FFO per diluted share, experienced a slight increase,but fell short of our guidance as illustrated below ($ in millions, except per share amounts).to Net Income and Diluted EPS:

 

   2015   2014   Change 

Net Income

  $221.9    $195.0     13.8

Adjusted Net Income(1)

  $227.1    $225.0     1.0

Dividends per share

  $2.16    $2.04     5.9

Normalized FFO(2)

  $2.69    $2.65     1.5

EPS

  $1.88    $1.66     13.3

Adjusted EPS(3)

  $1.93    $1.92     0.5

Closing Stock Price at Fiscal Year-End

  $26.49    $36.34     -27.1

 

 

2018 Financial Guidance

(February 14, 2018)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Low End

 

 

Mid-Point

 

 

High End

 

 

Actual

Performance

 

Net Income (in thousands)

 

$

167,000

 

 

$

171,750

 

 

$

176,500

 

 

$

159,207

 

Adjusted Net Income

 

$

168,000

 

 

$

172,750

 

 

$

177,500

 

 

$

172,008

 

Adjusted EBITDA (in thousands) (1)

 

$

381,000

 

 

$

385,500

 

 

$

390,000

 

 

$

395,952

 

Diluted EPS

 

$

1.40

 

 

$

1.44

 

 

$

1.48

 

 

$

1.34

 

Adjusted EPS (1)

 

$

1.41

 

 

$

1.45

 

 

$

1.49

 

 

$

1.45

 

Normalized FFO per diluted share (1)

 

$

2.23

 

 

$

2.27

 

 

$

2.31

 

 

$

2.31

 

 

(1)

(1)

Adjusted Net Income, represents GAAP net income, adjusted for the Company’s expenses incurred in connection with the debt refinancing activities, expenses associated with mergers and acquisition activity and certain impairments that the Company believes are unusual or nonrecurring, and do not reflect the ongoing operations of the Company. These adjustments are specified in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Funds from Operations.”

(2)Normalized FFO is FFO adjusted to exclude income and expenses deemed non-recurring, infrequent or unusual, even though such items may require cash settlement, because such items do not reflect a necessary component of our ongoing operations. Our reconciliation of FFOAdjusted EBITDA, Adjusted EPS, and Normalized FFO from net incomeper diluted share are containedmeasures calculated and presented on the basis of methodologies other than in our Annual Report on 10-Kaccordance with GAAP. Please refer to the Appendix for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 under the heading “Management’s Discussionfurther discussion and Analysisreconciliations of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Funds from Operations.”these measures to their most comparable GAAP measures.

We entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, ("the New Credit Agreement"), in an aggregate principal amount of up to $1.0 billion, replacing our pre-existing $900.0 million revolving credit facility and the associated incremental term loan, which was originally $100.0 million.  The New Credit Agreement provides for a Term Loan of $200.0 million and a revolving credit facility in an aggregate principal amount of up to $800.0 million. The New Credit Agreement, among other things, extended the maturity from July 2020 to April 2023, and increased the total leverage covenant from 5.0x to 5.5x.

We priced and closed on $159.5 million in aggregate principal amount of non-recourse senior secured notes in a private placement.  Proceeds of the private placement, which are drawn on quarterly funding dates, are being used to fund construction of the Lansing Correctional Facility, as described hereafter, along with costs and expenses of the project.  The non-recourse senior secured notes, have a yield to maturity of 4.43% and are scheduled to mature in January 2040.

CoreCivic Safety

We executed a new contract with the USMS to care for up to 1,350 offenders at our Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility. The initial term of the contract, which also authorizes the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) to utilize available capacity, continues through June 2020, with unlimited two-year extension options thereafter upon mutual agreement.

We executed a new agreement with ICE to care for approximately 1,000 adult detainees at our 3,060‑bed La Palma Correctional Center in Arizona, although ICE may use additional capacity, if available.  The new agreement has an indefinite term, subject to termination by either party with 90 daysʼ written notice.

We executed a new contract with the Vermont Department of Corrections to care for up to 350 of the Stateʼs offenders at our Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility.  The contract has an initial term of two years, with one additional two-year extension option thereafter upon mutual agreement.

We accepted approximately 100 offenders from the state of Wyoming at our 2,672-bed Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility in Mississippi under an out-of-state contract not used since 2010.

(3)

Adjusted EPS represents earnings per share adjusted

We executed a new contract with the state of South Carolina to care for the items described under “Compensation for 2015—Annual Cash Incentive Plan Compensation” below.up to 48 offenders at our Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility.


Negative one-yearCoreCivic Community

We completed the acquisition of Rocky Mountain Offender Management Systems, LLC (“RMOMS”), which provides non-residential correctional alternatives, including electronic monitoring and case management services, to municipal, county, and state governments in seven states.  

We completed the acquisition of Recovery Monitoring Solutions Corporation (“RMSC”), which provides non-residential correctional alternatives, including electronic monitoring and case management services, to municipal, county, and state governments in four states.

CoreCivic Properties

We completed the acquisition of the 261,000 square-foot Capital Commerce Center, located in Tallahassee, Florida.  Capital Commerce Center is 98% leased, including 87% leased to the state of Florida on behalf of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation.

We entered into a 20-year lease agreement with the Kansas Department of Corrections for a 2,432-bed correctional facility we are constructing in Lansing, Kansas. The new facility will replace the Lansing Correctional Facility, the Stateʼs largest correctional complex for adult male inmates, originally constructed in 1863.

We completed the acquisition of a portfolio of twelve properties which are 100% leased to the U.S. Federal Government through the General Services Administration (“GSA”), an independent agency of the United States government, on behalf of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”), the Department of Homeland Security, and ICE.

We completed the acquisition of a 541,000 square-foot SSA office building in Baltimore, Maryland.  The office building was purpose‑built to SSA specifications in 2014 under a 20‑year firm term lease expiring in January 2034.

We completed the acquisition of a 217,000 square-foot, steel frame property in Dayton, Ohio that was built-to-suit for the National Archives and Records Administration (“NARA”), in 2002.  The building is 100% leased to the GSA on behalf of NARA through January 2023 and includes two additional 10-year renewal options.  The building provides 1.2 million cubic feet of storage space, approximately 90% of which is dedicated to archives of the Internal Revenue Service.

Stock Price Performance and TSR ranking between the 25th and Median compared to ourRanking Within Our Peer Group.Group

Despite our solid operational and financial results, ourOur stock price decreased from a closing price of $36.34$22.50 at fiscal year-end 20142017 to $26.49$17.83 for fiscal year end 2015.year-end 2018. We believe our stock price was impacted by controversy regarding certain administration policies including aspects of the administration’s Zero Tolerance Border Policy; uncertainty regarding the timing of proposed initiatives and activities related to criminal justice reform; concerns regarding labor market challenges; and an overall decline in the stock market in December 2018. Our total stockholder return or TSR,(“TSR”) for 20152018 and the three-year and five-year periods ended December 31, 20152018, and ranking within our peer group, are illustrated below. The decline in our stock price in 2015 was impacted in

part by a decline in inmate population in California due to regulatory changes in California as well as the increased interest rate environment that negatively impacted many REIT stocks. As ofOn March 14, 2016,18, 2019, our closing stock price was $31.22.$19.13.

 

TSR

TSR

Percentile

Ranking

within Peer

Group

One YearOne-Year TSR

-21.99

(13.99

)%

30th

35th

Three YearThree-Year TSR

2.03

(15.05

)%

24th

13th

Five YearFive-Year TSR

8.90

(20.33

)%

35th

12th

Pay for Performance.

Pay for performance is an important component of our longstanding executive compensation philosophy. Our compensation approach is designed to incentivize our executives to substantially contribute individually and


collaboratively to our long-term, sustainable growth. We use normalizedNormalized FFO per share as one of the primary performance metrics becauseby which annual cash incentive compensation may be earned, and as the sole performance metric for the determination of vesting of performance-based restricted stock units (“RSUs”). As a REIT, we believe that with the Company’s REIT structure, normalizedNormalized FFO reflects the value deliveredwe deliver to our stockholders, and reflects long term value creation as it measures ourwell as the earnings and cash generatingcash-generating potential fromof our core business,portfolio, and is comparable to performance metrics used by other REITs. In 2017, we added Adjusted EBITDA as a complimentary financial performance metric for our annual cash incentive plan because, unlike FFO, Adjusted EBITDA is not impacted by fluctuations in taxes and short-term financing issues, such as debt refinancing and equity issuances. We also allocated a portion of the total annual bonus opportunity to the achievement of objective, strategic business goals pre-established by our Compensation Committee that are related to the successful execution of our long-term growth and diversification strategy.

Financial Performance Drives Annual Cash Incentive Payout. We generally target 75% of base salary for bonus awards under our annual cash incentive plan for all of our NEOs, including our Chief Executive Officer. Provided we generate positive adjusted earnings per diluted share (“Adjusted EPS”), annual cash incentives awarded to our NEOs as a percentage of base salary are determined by our actual performance against pre-established Normalized FFO, Adjusted EBITDA and objective, strategic business goals. Despite a challenging environment, our 2018 financial results met or exceeded our full year financial guidance set forth in our quarterly earnings press release dated February 14, 2018 for Adjusted EPS, Normalized FFO and Adjusted EBITDA, and we achieved a majority of the strategic business goals adopted by our Compensation Committee. Our performance resulted in each of our NEOs earning an annual cash incentive payout at 95.43% of actual base salary:

 

 

 

2018 Financial Guidance

(February 14, 2018)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Low End

 

 

Mid-Point

 

 

High End

 

 

Actual

Performance

 

 

Bonus % of

Base Salary

 

Adjusted EPS (1)

 

$

1.41

 

 

$

1.45

 

 

$

1.49

 

 

$

1.45

 

 

 

 

Normalized FFO per diluted share (1)

 

$

2.23

 

 

$

2.27

 

 

$

2.31

 

 

$

2.31

 

 

 

30.25

%

Adjusted EBITDA (in thousands) (1)

 

$

381,000

 

 

$

385,500

 

 

$

390,000

 

 

$

395,952

 

 

 

43.30

%

Strategic Business Goals (2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

87.52

%

 

 

21.88

%

Cash Incentive Bonus Earned:

 

 

 

95.43

%

(1)

Adjusted EPS, Normalized FFO per diluted share and Adjusted EBITDA are measures calculated and presented on the basis of methodologies other than in accordance with GAAP. Please refer to the Appendix for further discussion and reconciliations of these measures to their most comparable GAAP measures.

Below Target Payout Under

(2)

The descriptions of our pre-established strategic business goals for 2018 and the bonus award levels available upon achievement of each such goal, are detailed under “Executive and Director Compensation—Executive Summary—NEO Compensation for 2018—Annual Cash Incentive Plan. For 2015, as Compensation” in 2014, we used normalized funds from operations, or FFO, as the primary performance metric by which incentive compensation may be earned, once we achieved positive adjusted earnings per share, or Adjusted EPS. Under our annual cash incentive plan we target 75% of actual salary for the annual cash incentive award for all of our NEOs, including our Chief Executive Officer. For 2015, we achieved positive Adjusted EPS of $1.93 and only a slight increase in normalized FFO per share of $2.69 per share, which, pursuant to the pre-established formula, yielded an annual cash incentive payout of 51% of actual salary, which is meaningfully below 75% of base salary paid for target performance. The 2015 bonuses were paid consistent with this formula.Proxy Statement.

Performance-Based RSUs Align Interests of Executives with Stockholders. We align management’s interests with those of our stockholders by ensuring a substantial portion of each executive officer’s pay is at risk based on our objective performance. Long-term incentive compensation granted by our Compensation Committee consists solely of performance-based RSUs that vest ratably over a three-year vesting period based on our performance against pre-established Normalized FFO goals. If the pre‑established Normalized FFO performance goal for any one year is not met, the tranche of RSUs for such year will not vest and will be forfeited. As a result of our 2018 Normalized FFO performance of $2.31 per diluted share, the 2018 tranche of outstanding performance-based RSUs granted in 2016 did not vest and was forfeited while the tranches corresponding with 2017 and 2018 did vest. The performance‑based RSUs granted in 2018 and 2017 had a grant date fair value of $21.63 per share and $32.69 per share, respectively, but a realized value on the date they were earned and vested (February 25, 2019) of $21.97 per share.

Performance Based RSUs Align the Interests of our Executives with our REIT Stockholders. In 2015, in order to continue to align management’s interests with those of our stockholders, to tie compensation to our performance as a REIT and to put a substantial portion of the executive’s pay at risk based on our performance, the Compensation Committee granted performance-based RSUs in 2015 with the performance metric based on our normalized FFO growth rate. These performance-based RSUs vest over a three year period, with 1/3rd vesting per year if we achieve the pre-established normalized FFO performance goal for that year, which goal is based on pre-established compounded annual growth rates. Commencing with the performance awards made in 2015, if the pre-established performance goal for any one year is not met, the tranche for such year will be forfeited and not vest. In prior years, there was an ability to earn that year’s tranche based on cumulative as well as annual goals. The cumulative feature was eliminated to more directly tie the interests of our executives with the real time interests of our stockholders. For 2015, FFO performance exceeded the minimum FFO goals and resulted in vesting of the 2015 tranche for our outstanding performance-based RSUs. The performance based RSUs granted in 2015 had a grant date fair value of $40.24 but a realized value on the date they were earned and vested (February 25, 2016) of $29.38.

Substantial Compensation Tied to Our Objective Performance.Performance

All of our equity is granted in the form of performance-based RSUs that vest only based upon our normalizedNormalized FFO performance, and our annual cash incentives are earned based upon our objective financial performance against pre-established financial performance and objective, strategic business goals. As a result, a substantial portion of executive compensation is at risk, paid based on our objective performance and tied to the interests of our stockholders and long-term value creation. The following table illustrateschart and tables illustrate the degree to which the actual total direct actual compensation of our CEO for 20152018 was earned (or forfeited) based on our performance.performance, as well as the


LOGO

All values derive from the Summaryvalue of performance-based RSUs voluntarily surrendered by, or not granted by our Compensation Table for 2015 for Mr. Hininger. “Other” includes “Change in Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” and “All Other Compensation” as described in the Summary Compensation Table.

At or Below Market Median Compensation. Our independent compensation consultant, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, or PwC, conducts competitive analyses from time to timeCommittee at the request of, our CEO:

In support of the cost reduction plan we announced in 2016, Mr. Hininger voluntarily forfeited the 70,817 performance-based RSUs awarded to him in 2016, and, at Mr. Hininger’s request, our Compensation Committee did not award him any RSUs in order2017. The table below sets forth the total value of at risk, incentive compensation Mr. Hininger did not receive for 2018 with respect to provide a comparison of our compensation practices against a peer group of companies. performance-based RSUs that were forfeited (voluntarily or based on performance) or not awarded to Mr. Hininger at his request:

Performance-Based

RSUs Tranche

 

Performance-

Based

RSUs (#)

 

 

Disposition

 

Fair Value

on 2018

Vesting

Date(1)

 

 

Accumulated

Dividend

Equivalent

Rights

 

 

Total

Compensation

Value

 

2018 Tranche of 2016 RSUs

 

 

23,607

 

 

Forfeited (Voluntary)

 

$

518,646

 

 

$

128,422

 

 

$

647,068

 

2018 Tranche of 2017 RSUs

 

 

21,882

 

 

Not Awarded (Voluntary)

 

$

480,748

 

 

$

74,399

 

 

$

555,147

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

1,202,215

 

(1)

The performance-based RSUs originally scheduled to vest in 2018 had a value on the date they would have been earned and vested (February 25, 2019) of $21.97 per share.

Compensation Compared with Market Median

In February 2014 in connection with our conversion to a REIT,2017 our Compensation Committee, with the assistance of PwC, performed a comprehensive review of our executive compensation program, which included an extensive competitive market analysis. Our peer group as establishedThe PwC competitive market analysis indicated:

Target total direct compensation for most of our NEOs (consisting of annual base salary, annual cash incentive and long-term equity-based incentive compensation) was in 2014 was 29 companies, including 14 REIT companies. In determiningline with the market median of our peer group for 2014, the Compensation Committee and PwC took into account our REIT status and our then current financial metrics.companies.


 

At the time

The annual base salaries for several of the February 2014 PwC report, our total cash compensation in 2014 was generallyNEOs were below median market, and total direct compensation in 2014 was generally at or below median market, when compared to our peer group. The 2014 PwC report found that our EPS growth, return on equity and TSR were above the market median and the 50th percentile of our peer group and we were positioned at the 50th percentile in terms of revenues and in between the 25th and 50th percentile in terms of market capitalization and fixed assets of the peer group.companies.

The Compensation Committee continuedA greater amount of our long-term equity-based incentive compensation is subject to use the 2014 PwC report as a guideline in making its 2015 compensation decisions, establishing targeted ranges for each elementobjective performance goals than many of direct compensation based on market median of theour peer group For 2015, the Compensation Committee determined to:companies.

maintain equity grant values at the same level as provided in 2014, which levels were below the median LTIP fair value of the 2014 PwC report;

maintain the cash incentive plan target opportunities at 75% of base salary for target performance for all participants: and

provide salary increases of 2.5% in July 2015We are committed to all NEOs other than Mr. Garfinkle, who received a 7.5% increase to move his salary closer to market midpoint as reflected in the 2014 PwC report. The increase in salaries resulted in all NEOs being below Salary Midpoint of the 2014 PwC report, exceptmanaging our Company for the CEO, whose salary increase put him slightly abovebenefit of our stockholders, acting with the Salary Midpoint.

Compensation Best Practices and Governance. We believe in keeping the upmostutmost integrity and serving as a responsible fiduciary to our stockholders. We are committed to managing the company for the benefit of the stockholders andregarding our executive compensation practices. Further, we are focused on maintainingadopting best practices and practicing good governance and establishing best practicesregarding our executive compensation programs that work within our objectives and which we deemour Compensation Committee deems advisable. PracticesCompensation practices that illustrate that commitmentthese commitments include:

More than 74% of the compensation of our executive officers in 2018 was tied to performance.

We maintain anstock ownership guidelines for our directors and executive officers.

We maintain anti-hedging and anti-pledging policy;policies.

Our Compensation Committee works with an independent consultant, who did a comprehensive revamping of our peer group and guidelines for 2014, better reflecting our REIT status;

We provide limited perks;perquisites to our NEOs and other executive officers.

We do NOT provide tax gross ups (except in connection with relocations);.

We maintain stock ownership guidelines forDividend equivalents on our directors and executive officers; and

Our dividend equivalentsperformance-based RSUs are earned and are paid in cash only when and to the extent the underlying performance-based RSU is earned and paid.RSUs become vested.

Favorable Results of 20152018 Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation.

At our 20152018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, our stockholders overwhelmingly approved the compensation of our NEOs with more than 97%93% of the votes cast voting in favor of our advisory “say on pay” proposal. TheOur Compensation Committee and the Company view these results as an indication that our stockholders support our executive compensation policies, and thus no changes were made to our compensation programs in 2018 as a result of this vote. Nonetheless, theour Compensation Committee continues to evaluateregularly evaluates our executive compensation plans and policies, compensation best practices and consider additional performance metricsmarket compensation trends, and meansconsiders alternatives for tying pay to performance.

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

The fundamental objectivesstrengthening the alignment of our executive compensation policies areprogram with our compensation philosophy and objectives, our business strategy, competitive market practices and long-term stockholder value creation.

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

The foundational philosophy of our executive compensation programs is to provide a total mix of compensation, comprising base salary, annual cash incentive compensation and long-term equity-based incentive awards, which enables us to attract and maintainretain executive leadership that will execute our business strategy, uphold our values, deliver positive results and create long-term value tofor our stockholders. Accordingly, theour Compensation Committee develops compensation strategies and programs that will attract, retain and motivate highly qualified and high-performing executives through compensation that is:

Performance-basedPerformance-based: A significant component of total compensation should be determined based on whether or not we achieve objective performance criteria that are aligned with positive operational performance, the successful execution of our growth strategy and the creation of long-term stockholder value, and which do not encourage unreasonable risk-taking.

Competitive: Total compensation should be determined based on whether or not we meet performance criteria that are alignedmarket competitive relative to our peers, with growth in stockholder valuetotal direct compensation generally being targeted at the 50th percentile of our peer group. We believe targeting total direct compensation at the 50th percentile of our peer group enables us to recruit and do not encourage unreasonable risk-taking.

Competitive: Payretain the best talent for the organization, while achieving an appropriate balance between paying for performance scales are established so the competitive positioningand maintaining control of an executive’s totalour compensation reflects the competitive positioningexpense. As a consequence of the Company’s performance, i.e., high Company performance relative to peersour full year financial results in high compensation relative to competitive benchmarks, and vice versa.


 

Balanced: Performance-oriented features and retention-oriented features should be balanced so the entire program accomplishes the Company’s pay-for-performance and executive retention objectives, while encouraging prudent risk-taking that is aligned with the Company’s overall strategy.

Fair: Compensation levels and plan design should reflect competitive practices, our performance relative to peer companies and the relationshipaccomplishment of compensation levels from one executive to another.

In making its determinations, the Compensation Committee performs an overall analysisa majority of our strategic business and reentry‑focused goals, the 95.43% of the executive’s performance for the year, projected role and responsibilities, impact on execution of Company strategy, external pay practices, total cash and total direct compensation positioning relative to other Company executives, the recommendations of our Chief Executive Officer and such other factors the Committee deems appropriate. Our Committee also considers employee retention, vulnerability to recruitment by other companies and the difficulty and costs associated with replacing executive talent. Based on these objectives, the Committee has determined that our Company should provide its executives with compensation packages comprised of three primary elements:

1)base salary payout under our annual cash incentive plan exceeded the 75% of base salary target, which takes individual performance into account and is designed to be competitive with median salary levelsresulted in an appropriate peer group;

2)annual variable performance awards, payable in cash and2018 total direct compensation for certain of our NEOs that we believe, based on the financial performancepeer surveys requested from time to time by the Compensation Committee from PwC, was generally within a competitive range of the Company, in accordance withmedian of our peer companies:

NEO

 

2018 Total

Direct

Compensation

 

 

Peer Group

Median Total

Direct

Compensation (1)

 

 

Variance to

Peer Group

Median (%)

 

Damon T. Hininger

 

$

3,956,324

 

 

$

5,437,000

 

 

 

(27.23

)%

David M. Garfinkle

 

$

1,923,049

 

 

$

1,927,000

 

 

 

(0.21

)%

Patrick D. Swindle

 

$

1,840,949

 

 

$

2,299,000

 

 

 

(19.92

)%

Anthony L. Grande

 

$

1,938,055

 

 

$

2,107,000

 

 

 

(8.02

)%

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

$

1,840,949

 

 

$

1,707,000

 

 

 

7.85

%

ALL NEOs

 

$

11,499,326

 

 

$

13,477,000

 

 

 

(14.67

)%

(1)

Peer Group Median Total Direct Compensation amounts are derived from the goals established by the Committee; andCompensation Committee's request from time to time of such information from PwC.

 

3)long-term stock-based incentive awards that vest based on the performance of the Company, which strengthens the commonality of interests between executive officers and our stockholders.

BenefitsBalanced: Performance-oriented features and perquisites play a limited role inretention-oriented features should be balanced so the entire program accomplishes both pay-for-performance and executive retention objectives, while encouraging prudent risk-taking that is aligned with our executives’ totalgrowth and diversification strategies.

Fair: Compensation levels and plan design should fairly reflect competitive practices and the relationship of compensation packages. Thelevels among our executives.

Process for Determining Compensation – Independent Review and Use of Market Data

Role of Compensation Committee believes that as a result

Our Compensation Committee establishes and regularly reviews our compensation philosophy and programs, exercises authority with respect to the determination and payment of base and incentive compensation to executive officers and administers our balance of long-Second Amended and short-term incentives, our use of performance-based RSUs with dividend equivalents that provide a tie to our stockholders interests and our stock ownership guidelines, our executive compensation program currently serves our objectives well.

Process – Independent Review and Use of Market Data as a Guideline

TheRestated 2008 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2008 Plan”). Our Compensation Committee annually reviews executive compensation and our compensation policiesprograms to ensure that the Chief Executive Officerour CEO and the other executive officers are rewarded appropriately for their contributions to our success, and that theour overall compensation strategy supports the objectives and values of our organization, as well as stockholder interests. TheOur Compensation Committee conducts this review and makes compensation decisions through a comprehensive process involving a series of meetings primarily occurring in the first and second quarters of each year. Compensation Committee meetings typically are attended by theour Compensation Committee members, legal advisors, our Chairman of the Board, our Chief Executive OfficerCEO and, upon request, the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant. As with all Board committees, other Board members also have a standing invitation to attend theour Compensation Committee’s meetings. Our Chief Executive OfficerCEO generally makes recommendations to theour Compensation Committee regarding equity awards for the executive officers other than himself. TheOur Compensation Committee meets in executive session to the extent the members deem necessary or appropriate to ensure independent analysis and determinations. Additional information regarding theour Compensation Committee and Committeeits meetings is included above under “Corporate Governance – Board of Director Meetings and Committees.”

UseIn making executive compensation determinations, our Compensation Committee performs an overall analysis of the executive’s performance for the year, projected role and responsibilities, impact on execution of our strategy, external pay practices, emerging trends, total cash and total direct compensation positioning relative to our other executives and our peer group, the recommendations of our CEO (only as to our other non-CEO executive officers) and such other factors our Compensation Committee deems appropriate. Our Compensation Committee also considers employee retention, vulnerability to recruitment by other companies and the difficulty and costs associated with replacing executive talent. Based on these objectives, our Compensation Committee has determined we should provide our executives with compensation packages comprising three primary elements:


1)

annual base salary, which takes individual performance into account and is designed to be competitive with median salary levels in an appropriate peer group;

2)

annual cash incentive compensation, which is determined based on the achievement of objective financial performance and strategic business goals established annually by our Compensation Committee; and

3)

long-term equity-based incentive awards that vest based on the performance of the Company, which strengthens the commonality of interests between executive officers and our stockholders.

Benefits and perquisites play a limited role in our executives’ total compensation packages. Our Compensation Committee believes that, as a result of our balance of long- and short-term incentives and our use of performance-based RSUs with dividend equivalents that provide a tie to our stockholders interests and our stock ownership guidelines, our executive compensation programs currently serve our compensation philosophy and objectives well.

Role of Independent Compensation Consultant.Consultant

Since 2000, theour Compensation Committee has engaged PwC from time to time to assist it in reviewing compensation strategies and plans and to provide market competitive data. When requested, PwC works directly with the chair of theour Compensation Committee and, as directed by the chair of theour Compensation Committee, with our Chief Executive Officer.CEO and other executive officers. PwC was selected due to its extensive experience in providing compensation consulting services. At theour Compensation Committee’s request, PwC has from time to time performed severalcompensation analyses, including peer and market comparisons, internal pay equity assessments, updating of the executive salary structure and modeling of executive compensation levels at different levels of Companycompany performance. Our Compensation Committee does not use the market data to benchmark our compensation; instead, theseThese analyses and the input from PwC have assisted theour Compensation Committee in determining if itswhether our strategies and plans were advisable based on the Company’s current financial position and strategic business goals, as well as developmentscompetitive with our peers and consistent with best practices, in corporate governance and compensation design. Additional information regarding the engagement and independence of PwC as independent compensation consultant to our Compensation Committee is included above under “Corporate Governance – Board Meetings and Committees.”

Peer Group Review and Market Data.Update

In 2015,2017, at the request of our Compensation Committee, continuedPwC assessed and recommended adjustments with respect to useour peer group selection methodology and composition. The Composition Committee considered the market data analysis provided byrecommendations of PwC in February 2014. This market data analysis employed a peer group recommended by PwC that reflected updates due to the then recent conversionits adoption of the Companyfollowing criteria for identifying appropriate companies to a REIT. In the 2014 updates, the Compensation Committee used a peer group of 23 companies

(including 14 REIT companies) and eliminated certain companies that were not dividend paying. Based on the recommendation of PwC, we employed the following as filters for determininginclude in our peer group:

Owners and operators of multi-state facilities delivering services to third parties;and complex operations;

Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) Code 601010 – Equity REITs;

Revenues of $900 million to $6 billionbillion;

Greater than 10,000 employees;

Minimum employee base of 10,000;

Market capitalization between $3 billion to $6 billion;

Dividend payout ratio of greater than 60% of net income;

Investment in fixed assets of $2$1.5 billion to $5$6 billion;

Local competitors for executive talent; and


Future growth heavily dependent upon the acquisition or development of additional facilities.

The followingApplying the foregoing selection criteria and PwCʼs recommendations for potential peer group companies, were selectedand considering the Company's overall compensation strategy, the peer group used by PwC and approved by theour Compensation Committee for inclusion in2018 consisted of the 2014 peer group:following companies:

 

Brookdale Senior Living, Inc.

Iron Mountain Incorporated

CBL & Associates Properties, Inc.

Packaging Corporation of America

Cinemark Holdings, Inc.

Penn National Gaming, Inc.

Duke Realty Corporation

Piedmont Office Realty Trust

Federal Realty Investment Trust

Quanta Services, Inc.

The Geo Group, Inc.

    HealthSouthRayonier, Inc.

Encompass Health Corporation (f/k/a Health

    Hospitality Properties TrustRealty Income Corporation

South Corporation)

Weingarten Realty Investors

Hyatt Hotels Corporation

 

•    Realty Income Corporation

 

•    Weingarten Realty Investors

•    Iron Mountain Incorporated

•    LifePoint Hospitals, Inc.

•    MeadwestVaco Corporation

•    Packaging Corp. of America

•    Penn National Gaming Inc.

•    Piedmont Office Realty Trust

•    Plum Creek Timber Co., Inc.

•    Quanta Services, Inc.

•    Rayonier, Inc.

•    Regal Entertainment Group

•    Senior Housing Properties Trust

None

This peer group was identical to the peer group we used in 2017, except that LaSalle Hotel Properties, LifePoint Health, Inc., and Regal Entertainment Group were not included in our 2018 peer group because they were acquired by other entities during 2018.

While none of our peer group companies met all of the filters, and generally theselection criteria, each peer group companiescompany met approximately two or more of the filters. In general,selection criteria. Generally, we were at the 50th percentile of revenuesmarket capitalization among our peers, and between the 25thand 50thpercentile of market capitalizationrevenues and fixed assets of our peers.

Total Direct TargetNEO Compensation Guidelines. Based on the extensive market analysis performed by PwC in 2014 , and based on internal pay equity considerations and a considerationfor 2018  

Components of our compensation objectives and philosophies, with a particular emphasis on performance and equity as key drivers for executive compensation, the executive compensation structure set forth in the table below was developed by the Committee in 2014 in consultation with PwC for purposes of providing a point of reference for comparing future compensation decisions, including as a guideline for 2015 compensation decisions. The midpoint amounts are aligned with the 50th percentile of peer group proxy data by rank. References in this Proxy to the Salary Midpoint or the LTIP Fair Value are to the following table valuations.NEO Compensation

Position
Level

  

Position Titles

  Base Salary Structure   

Bonus

  LTIP Fair
Value
   Total
Comp.
Midpoint (1)
 
    Minimum   Midpoint   Maximum      

A

  Chief Executive Officer  $675,000    $840,000    $1,005,000     75 $2,500,000    $3,970,000  

B

  Chief Financial Officer, Chief Corrections Officer and Chief Development Officer  $335,000    $420,000    $505,000     75 $850,000    $1,585,000  

C

  General Counsel  $275,000    $345,000    $415,000     75 $735,000    $1,338,750  

(1)Equals the sum of base salary midpoint plus target bonus plus LTIP fair value.

Compensation for 2015

The primary components of our 2015the 2018 compensation program werefor our NEOs were:

Annual base salary;

Annual cash incentive compensation; and

Long-term incentive compensation consisting of a mix of base salary and our annual cash incentive plan compensation, and equity incentives, consisting solely of restricted stock unitsRSU awards with performance-based vesting.

Annual Base Salary

We seek to provide base salaries for our executive officers that provide a secure level of guaranteed cash compensation in accordance with their experience, professional status and job responsibilities. Typically in the second quarter of each year, theour Compensation Committee reviews and, if applicable, approves a revisedan annual salary plan for our executive officers, taking into account several factors, including prior year’s salary, responsibilities, tenure, individual performance, salaries paid by comparable companies in our peer group for comparable positions, the Company’s overall pay scale and the Company’s recent and projected financial performance. As part of PwC’s 2014 study,a general guideline, our Compensation Committee believes the Committee determined that base salary generallyof each executive officer should be set at or belowtargeted to the 50th50th percentile of the benchmarks from the PwC market analysis,survey and peer group benchmark data provided by our independent compensation consultant, subject to adjustment to account for the individual factors referenced above. This market positioning was based on the Committee’s objective of providingdescribed above, in order to provide competitive base salaries for recruiting and retention purposes.

TheOur Compensation Committee also solicits the views and recommendations of our Chief Executive Officer,CEO, in consultation with our Chairman, when setting the base salaries of the other executive officers, given their respective insight into internal pay equity and positioning issues, as well as executive performance. At a Compensation Committee meeting typically held in the first or second quarter of each year, the Chief Executive Officerour CEO summarizes his assessment of the performance


during the previous year of each of the other executive officers. The Chief Executive Officer,Our CEO, in consultation with our Chairman, also provides his recommendations on any compensation adjustments. TheOur Compensation Committee approves any base salary adjustments for these executives based on factors such factors as the competitive compensation analysis, the Chief Executive Officer’sour CEO’s assessment of individual performance, the Company’s performance, and the location in the salary range of the executive’s current salary within the applicable salary range, general market conditions and internal pay equity considerations.

The process is similar for determining any base salary adjustments for the Chief Executive Officer,our CEO, except that the Chief Executive Officerour CEO does not provide theour Compensation Committee with a recommendation. The Chief Executive OfficerOur CEO presents a self-assessment of his performance during the year to theour Compensation Committee, which then approves any base salary adjustment based on the factors described above with respect to theour other executives. To the extent it deems necessary and appropriate, theour Compensation Committee meets in executive sessionsessions to discuss adjustments to the base salaries of the Company’sour executive officers, including the Chief Executive Officer.our CEO. Such adjustments typically take effect on or about July 1 of each year.

During 2015, after review of the 2014 PwC reportAfter reviewing peer and consultationmarket data, and consulting with theour CEO regarding the other NEOs’ responsibilities, performance and his recommendations, theour Compensation Committee approved a 2.5% increasethe following increases to the base salaries paid to each of our NEOs other(other than Mr. Garfinkle, who received a 7.5% increase,Swindle whose base salary is discussed below):

Name

 

2018 Base

Salary

 

 

2017 Base

Salary

 

 

Percentage

Increase

 

Damon T. Hininger

 

$

940,039

 

 

$

912,660

 

 

 

3.00

%

David M. Garfinkle

 

$

481,118

 

 

$

429,570

 

 

 

12.00

%

Anthony L. Grande

 

$

489,231

 

 

$

436,814

 

 

 

12.00

%

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

$

428,273

 

 

$

398,394

 

 

 

7.50

%

Mr. Swindle was appointed as the Company’s Executive Vice President and Chief Corrections Officer on January 1, 2018. In connection with this promotion, our Compensation Committee determined that Mr. Swindle’s 2018 base salary, effective January 1, 2018, should be $398,394. Consistent with the salaries effective as of July 6, 2015. Thereview process described above, our Compensation Committee believed that the raises weredetermined it was appropriate given that, based on the 2014 PwC report, the existing salaries were at or below the Salary Midpoint of their peers. The largerto increase for Mr. Garfinkle reflects the larger disparity between hisSwindle’s base salary to $428,273 in order to align his salary with our Compensation Committee’s general guideline of targeting base salary of our executive officers to the 50th percentile of market survey and peer group benchmark data provided by our independent compensation consultant. Prior to becoming the Salary Midpoint for his position of $420,000Company’s Executive Vice President and in recognition of the importance of his role.Chief Corrections Officer, Mr. Swindle was not an NEO.

 

Name

  2015 Base Salary
$
   2014 Base Salary
$
   Percentage
Increase
 

Damon T. Hininger

   861,000     840,000     2.5

David M. Garfinkle

   387,000     360,000     7.5

Harley G. Lappin

   412,089     402,038     2.5

Anthony L. Grande

   412,089     402,038     2.5

Steven E. Groom

   327,442     319,456     2.5

These base salary increases, in our Compensation Committee’s view, correctly positioned each NEO’s salary within a competitive range of our peer group companies.

Annual Cash Incentive Plan Compensation

Our annual cash incentive plan compensation provides our executive officers with the potential for significantly enhancedan opportunity to earn cash compensation based on the extent to which financialobjective performance targetsgoals set in advance by theour Compensation Committee are met. EachGenerally, our Compensation Committee sets the maximum bonus opportunity at 175% of the named executive officers in the annual cash incentive plan can earn between 5% and 200% of his or her actual salary based on our performance against pre-established financial goals, with 75% of base salary payable to each of our NEOs based on target performance against these goals.

The financial goals forpaid during the 2015 cash incentive plan were Adjusted EPS and growth in normalized funds from operations, or normalized FFO per share. In order for cash incentives to be payable, we must first achieve positive Adjusted EPS. If positive Adjusted EPS is not achieved, then no amounts could be earned under the cash incentive plan. Presuming positive Adjusted EPS criteria is met, the actual bonus payable is determined through the Committee’s exercise of negative discretion, based on our normalized FFO per share against pre-established goals as set forth in the table below. As in 2014, the Committee chose normalized FFO per share as the performance metric for 2015 alongyear, with positive Adjusted EPS, because it believes that with the Company operating as a REIT, there is a strong relationship between positive Adjusted EPS coupled with normalized FFO per share growth and growth in stockholder value. Normalized FFO per share is a common metric used to evaluate REITs, as it takes into account earnings from existing properties excluding the impact of depreciation of real estate assets, and thus measures the cash-generating potential of the REIT’s holdings.

Since 2010, the Compensation Committee has employed a target bonus opportunity of 75% of actual base salary, paid duringand exercises negative discretion to determine the yearactual annual cash incentive award for each of our executive officers based on our performance against the NEOs, includingpre-established, objective goals.

In 2017, our Chief Executive Officer.Compensation Committee, with the assistance of PwC, completed a comprehensive review of the annual and long-term incentive compensation plans for our executive management team. Based on this review, our Compensation Committee concluded the competitiveness of our annual cash incentive plan for attracting, retaining and rewarding high performing executives, as well as its alignment with our growth, investment and diversification strategies, would be improved by:

Including Adjusted EBITDA and Normalized FFO as complimentary financial performance metrics;

Providing for a minimum level of annual cash incentive compensation assuming we achieve positive Adjusted EPS; and

Allocating a portion of the total incentive compensation opportunity to the achievement of objective, strategic business goals.


Consistent with 2017, our Compensation Committee included Adjusted EBITDA as a complimentary financial performance goal to Normalized FFO because, unlike Normalized FFO, Adjusted EBITDA is not impacted by taxes and short-term financing issues, such as debt refinancing and equity issuances, that are not reflective of operating performance. Objective, strategic business goals were adopted as a performance metric because our Compensation Committee believes achieving meaningful progress in growing and diversifying our business and cash flows is critical to creating long-term value for our stockholders, but such progress may not be immediately reflected in our financial results. In addition, our Compensation Committee believes that value is returned to our stockholders when we invest in our workforce and those entrusted to our care by our government partners. For this reason, a portion of our NEOs’ annual cash incentive bonus opportunity was conditioned on measurable achievements in both employee leadership development programs and resident General Educational Development (“GED”) or equivalent completions. Our Compensation Committee believes the additional strategic business goals strike an appropriate balance in rewarding our executive officers for achieving positive financial results in the near-term, while strengthening their focus on the successful execution of our long-term growth strategy, as well as the development of both our workforce and those entrusted to our care by our government partners.

The initialAfter careful consideration of the market data, peer benchmarking and input from PwC, our Compensation Committee adopted a multi-factor formula (the “Multi-Factor Bonus Formula”) for the determination of awards to our executive officers under our annual cash incentive plan:

 

 

2018 Bonus Opportunity

Performance Metric

 

Minimum

 

Target

 

Maximum

Adjusted EPS*

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

N/A

Normalized FFO

 

8.50%

 

37.50%

 

75.00%

Adjusted EBITDA

 

8.50%

 

37.50%

 

75.00%

Strategic Business Goals

 

 

 

25.00%

TOTAL

 

17.00%

 

75.00%

 

175.00%

*

Positive Adjusted EPS is required as a threshold for incentive awards.

Under the Multi-Factor Bonus Formula, no cash incentive compensation is payable unless we generate positive Adjusted EPS for the year. Presuming we generate positive Adjusted EPS, the Multi-Factor Bonus Formula provides for a minimum cash incentive of 17% of actual base salary, but contemplates the maximum bonus awarded will not exceed 175% of actual base salary. Whether the actual cash bonus will exceed the 17% minimum bonus principally depends on our objective performance against pre-established Normalized FFO and Adjusted EBITDA goals. An additional bonus amount not to exceed 25% of actual base salary may be awarded at the discretion of our Compensation Committee based on their assessment of our performance with respect to several pre-established, strategic business goals related to the successful execution of our reentry, employee development, long-term growth, investment and diversification strategies.

Our Compensation Committee established the following goals and corresponding cash bonus amounts under the Multi-Factor Bonus Formula for Normalized FFO and Adjusted EBITDA based on the full year financial guidance for 2015, as set forth in the Company’sour earnings newspress release dated February 11, 2015, ranged from $1.94 to $2.02 for adjusted diluted EPS and from $2.67 to $2.75 for normalized FFO per share. The Compensation Committee establishes the performance goals based on a target bonus at 75% of base salary, which would be met for 2015 if we achieved positive Adjusted EPS and normalized FFO per share of $2.73 for 2015. The maximum bonus was set at 200% of base salary, which would be met if we achieved normalized FFO per share of $2.93. The Compensation Committee set the normalized FFO per share bonus range as set forth in the following table so that the target bonus would be met if we achieved positive Adjusted EPS and normalized FFO per share that fell between our initial guidance.14, 2018:


 

Normalized

FFO per share

  Bonus % of
Actual Salary
 

$2.60

   5.00

$2.61

   10.00

$2.62

   15.00

$2.63

   20.00

$2.64

   25.00

$2.65

   30.00

$2.66

   35.00

$2.67

   40.00

$2.68

   45.00

$2.69

   

 

51.00

(Actual


$2.70

   57.00

$2.71

   63.00

$2.72

   69.00

$2.73

   

 

75.00

(Target


$2.74

   80.26

$2.75

   85.55

Normalized

FFO per share

  Bonus % of
Actual Salary
 

$2.76

   90.84

$2.77

   96.13

$2.78

   101.42

$2.79

   106.71

$2.80

   112.00

$2.81

   119.00

$2.82

   126.00

$2.83

   133.00

$2.84

   140.00

$2.85

   147.00

$2.86

   154.00

$2.87

   160.58

$2.88

   167.15

$2.89

   173.72

$2.90

   180.29

$2.91

   186.86

$2.92

   193.43

$2.93

   200.00

 

 

 

Normalized

FFO per

share

 

 

Bonus % of

Base Salary

 

 

 

 

Adjusted

EBITDA

(in thousands)

 

 

Bonus % of

Base Salary

 

 

 

$

2.22

 

 

8.50%

 

 

Minimum Bonus

 

$

379,359

 

 

8.50%

 

 

Minimum Bonus

$

2.23

 

 

10.92%

 

 

 

 

$

380,584

 

 

10.92%

 

 

 

$

2.24

 

 

13.33%

 

 

 

 

$

381,809

 

 

13.33%

 

 

 

$

2.25

 

 

15.75%

 

 

 

 

$

383,034

 

 

15.75%

 

 

 

$

2.26

 

 

18.17%

 

 

 

 

$

384,259

 

 

18.17%

 

 

 

$

2.27

 

 

20.58%

 

 

 

 

$

384,906

 

 

20.58%

 

 

 

$

2.28

 

 

23.00%

 

 

 

 

$

386,709

 

 

23.00%

 

 

 

$

2.29

 

 

25.42%

 

 

 

 

$

387,933

 

 

25.42%

 

 

 

$

2.30

 

 

27.83%

 

 

 

 

$

389,158

 

 

27.83%

 

 

 

$

2.31

 

 

30.25%

 

 

 

 

$

390,383

 

 

30.25%

 

 

 

$

2.32

 

 

32.67%

 

 

 

 

$

391,608

 

 

32.67%

 

 

 

$

2.33

 

 

35.08%

 

 

 

 

$

392,833

 

 

35.08%

 

 

 

$

2.34

 

 

37.50%

 

 

Target Bonus

 

$

394,058

 

 

37.50%

 

 

Target Bonus

$

2.35

 

 

41.25%

 

 

 

 

$

395,283

 

 

41.25%

 

 

 

$

2.36

 

 

45.00%

 

 

 

 

$

396,508

 

 

45.00%

 

 

 

$

2.37

 

 

48.75%

 

 

 

 

$

397,733

 

 

48.75%

 

 

 

$

2.38

 

 

52.50%

 

 

 

 

$

398,958

 

 

52.50%

 

 

 

$

2.39

 

 

56.25%

 

 

 

 

$

400,183

 

 

56.25%

 

 

 

$

2.40

 

 

60.00%

 

 

 

 

$

401,407

 

 

60.00%

 

 

 

$

2.41

 

 

63.75%

 

 

 

 

$

402,632

 

 

63.75%

 

 

 

$

2.42

 

 

67.50%

 

 

 

 

$

403,857

 

 

67.50%

 

 

 

$

2.43

 

 

71.25%

 

 

 

 

$

405,082

 

 

71.25%

 

 

 

$

2.44

 

 

75.00%

 

 

Maximum Bonus

 

$

406,307

 

 

75.00%

 

 

Maximum Bonus

 

Adjusted EPS, Normalized FFO and normalized FFO per shareAdjusted EBITDA are adjusted for any of the items set forth in Section 11.2 of the Company’s Amended and Restated 2008 Stock Incentive Plan, or the 2008 Plan. For reconciliationAdjusted EPS, Normalized FFO and Adjusted EBITDA are amounts calculated and presented on the basis of EPS and FFO figures, pleasemethodologies other than in accordance with GAAP. Please refer to the reconciliation disclosureAppendix for further discussion and reconciliations of these measures to their most comparable GAAP measures.

For 2018, we generated $1.45 of positive Adjusted EPS, $2.31 of Normalized FFO and $395,952,000 of Adjusted EBITDA, resulting in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-Kbonuses being earned under the heading “Management’s DiscussionMulti-Factor Bonus Formula at 30.25% for our Normalized FFO performance and Analysis43.30% for our Adjusted EBITDA performance. Our Compensation Committee determined a bonus amount of Financial Condition21.88% had been earned for our performance in achieving the pre-established 2018 strategic business, residential reentry and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Funds from Operations.”employee development goals:

Strategic Goal

 

Maximum

Bonus (%)

 

 

2018

Performance

 

 

Actual Bonus

Award (%)

 

Acquire or develop a real estate only project or projects exceeding $30 million in aggregate.

 

10.00%

 

 

100%

 

 

10.00%

 

Complete amendment and extension of the Credit Facility

 

7.50%

 

 

100%

 

 

7.50%

 

Secure a contract to activate a facility idled as of February 1, 2018 through lease or operations contract.

 

2.50%

 

 

 

 

 

Increase CoreCivic University completions by Company employees over 2017 to preset percentage targets.(1)

 

2.50%

 

 

75%

 

 

1.88%

 

Increase resident GED or equivalent completions over 2017 by 3%.(2)

 

2.50%

 

 

100%

 

 

2.50%

 

(1)

CoreCivic University is the Company's enterprise learning vehicle for leadership training and operational skillset training for employees.

(2)

GED or equivalent completions refers to successful completions of a battery of exams intended to serve as a high school equivalency exam for test takers who did not complete a high school education.


Based on our Adjusted EPS of $1.93 and normalized FFO per share of $2.69 for 2015, bonuses were earned at 51% of salary, below target, and2018 performance, the following annual cash incentive plan compensation was awarded to our NEOs in February 20162019 consistent with such earned amount:the Multi-Factor Bonus Formula:

 

Name

  2015 Cash Incentive Compensation 

Damon T. Hininger

  $450,232  

David M. Garfinkle

  $197,547  

Harley G. Lappin

  $215,489  

Anthony L. Grande

  $215,489  

Steven E. Groom

  $171,225  

For 2016, the Compensation Committee determined to continue the umbrella annual cash incentive plan on substantially the same terms as in 2015, requiring positive Adjusted EPS and updated performance goals for normalized FFO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Normalized FFO

Goal

 

 

Adjusted EBITDA

Goal

 

 

Strategic Business

Goals

 

 

2018 Cash Incentive

Compensation

 

Name

 

2018 Base

Salary(1)

 

 

Bonus

(%)

 

 

Bonus

($)

 

 

Bonus

(%)

 

 

Bonus

($)

 

 

Bonus

(%)

 

 

Bonus

($)

 

 

Bonus

(%)

 

 

Bonus

($)

 

Damon T. Hininger

 

$

926,350

 

 

 

30.25

%

 

$

280,221

 

 

 

43.30

%

 

$

401,091

 

 

 

21.88

%

 

$

202,685

 

 

 

95.43

%

 

$

883,997

 

David M. Garfinkle

 

$

455,344

 

 

 

30.25

%

 

$

137,742

 

 

 

43.30

%

 

$

197,155

 

 

 

21.88

%

 

$

99,629

 

 

 

95.43

%

 

$

434,526

 

Patrick D. Swindle

 

$

413,334

 

 

 

30.25

%

 

$

125,034

 

 

 

43.30

%

 

$

178,965

 

 

 

21.88

%

 

$

90,437

 

 

 

95.43

%

 

$

394,436

 

Anthony L. Grande

 

$

463,023

 

 

 

30.25

%

 

$

140,064

 

 

 

43.30

%

 

$

200,480

 

 

 

21.88

%

 

$

101,309

 

 

 

95.43

%

 

$

441,853

 

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

$

413,334

 

 

 

30.25

%

 

$

125,034

 

 

 

43.30

%

 

$

178,965

 

 

 

21.88

%

 

$

90,437

 

 

 

95.43

%

 

$

394,436

 

(1)

The amounts in this column reflect the base salary actually paid by the Company to the NEO during the year and reflect, to the extent applicable, any changes in base salary during the year.

Performance-Based Equity Incentive Compensation

One of our keyOur pay mix is weighted toward equity compensation philosophies is thatbecause we believe long-term, stock-basedequity-based incentive compensation strengthens and aligns the interests of our executive officers with our stockholders. Equity incentive awards are generally granted to our executive officers on an annual basis. Our pay mix is shifted toward equity compensation, as we believe equity best ties the compensation of our executive officers with the interest of our stockholders. For 2015, consistent with 2014,2018, we granted all of our equity incentive awards in the form of performance-based RSUs. In 2013, the year of transition to REIT status, we granted only time-based RSUs. Prior to 2013, the Committee employed a compensation strategy utilizing a mix of stock options, with time-based vesting, and restricted stock units, with performance-based vesting based on our Adjusted EPS. In February 2015, in order to continue toRSUs, which align management’s interests with those of our stockholders to tie compensation toby putting a substantial portion of an executive’s pay at risk and dependent upon our performance as a REIT and to put a substantial portion of the executive’s pay at risk based on our performance, the Compensation Committee determined to grant performance-based RSUs in 2015 that are substantially similar to the performance-based RSUs granted in 2014 except that rather than vesting permitted based on cumulative normalized FFO growth as in 2014, if the performance goals in any one year for normalized FFO is not met, the tranche for such year will not vest and be forfeited.REIT.

The value of the performance-based RSUs granted in 2015 was at the same levels awarded in 2014. In making its determinations, theOur Compensation Committee considered many factors in determining whether to grant performance-based RSUs to our NEOs (as well as the value of RSUs granted), including a comparison toour financial performance, our progress in the successful execution of our growth and diversification strategy, competitive market practices, as reflected by the LTIP Fair Value from the 2014 PwC report (discussed above), internal pay equity, executive recruitment and theretention, and our focus on equity compensation in our pay mix to encourage long-term value creation, retention and alignmentcreation. The grant date fair value of performance-based RSUs awarded to NEOs, other than Mr. Hininger, in 2018 was consistent with stockholder interests.the RSUs awarded in 2017. In support of the cost reduction plan we announced in 2016, at Mr. Hininger’s request, our Compensation Committee did not award any performance-based RSUs to him in 2017.  Had Mr. Hininger been awarded RSUs in 2017, the grant date fair value of 2018 RSUs awarded would have been consistent with the 2017 RSU award.

 

Name

  2015 Performance-based
RSUs Granted
   Grant Date Fair Value   2014 LTIP Fair Value
of Peer Group
 

 

2018

Performance-

based

RSUs Granted

 

 

Grant Date

Fair Value

 

Damon T. Hininger

   48,371    $1,946,449    $2,500,000  

 

 

99,213

 

 

$

2,145,977

 

David M. Garfinkle

   23,288    $937,109    $850,000  

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

Harley G. Lappin

   23,288    $937,109    $850,000  

Patrick D. Swindle

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

Anthony L. Grande

   23,288    $937,109    $850,000  

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

Steven E. Groom

   19,179    $771,763    $735,000  

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

Terms of Performance-basedPerformance-Based RSUs Granted in 2015.2018. The performance-based RSUs granted in 20152018 vest based on our achievement of normalizedNormalized FFO per share goals in each year of the three a three‑year vesting period. Accordingly, theThe amount of performance-based RSUs aregranted is divided into three equal tranches, of 33% of the granted amount that will vest over a three year period, with 1/3rd, or aeach tranche vesting if we achieve the pre-established maximum normalizedNormalized FFO per shareperformance goal assigned to the vesting year. If we fail to achieve the Normalized FFO performance goal for that year’s tranche. The yearly goals are based on pre-established annual growth rates. Commencing for 2015 performance-based RSUs, the annual FFO per share performance goals are noncumulative so to the extent the maximum normalized FFO per share performance goal for a particularany vesting year, is missed, the tranche for such year will not vest and will, instead, be forfeited. Normalized FFO per share for purposes of these awards is our normalized FFO per share as reported in our quarterly and annual reports. The normalized FFO per share performance goals were established based on our historical FFO per share and five-year compounding of the maximum growth rates.


The table below sets forth the per shareNormalized FFO performance goalsgoal for each year in the three-year vesting period for the performance-based RSUs granted in 2015.2018:

 

Period/Tranche

  Normalized FFO Required for
Vesting of Tranche Each Year
 

2015

  $2.36  

2016

  $2.44  

2017

  $2.51  

Period/Tranche

 

Normalized FFO

Required for

Vesting of Tranche

Each Year

 

2018

 

$

1.74

 

2019

 

$

1.86

 

2020

 

$

1.98

 

Outstanding Performance-basedPerformance-Based RSUs Granted in 2014.2017.In 2014,2017, we granted performance-based RSUs that vest in accordance withare subject to the same vesting principles as the performance-based RSUs granted in 2015, except that the annual FFO performance goals are cumulative, such that to the extent that the maximum normalized FFO performance goal for a particular year is missed, if in the subsequent year the cumulative maximum normalized FFO performance goal is achieved, the tranche for the year in which the maximum goal is achieved will vest, plus each prior unvested tranche for the prior years (where maximum normalized FFO was not achieved) will also vest. Based on our normalized FFO per share of $2.69 for 2015, the second tranche of the award vested, representing one third of the shares granted, as set forth in the table below.2018. The table below sets forth the Normalized FFOperformance goalsgoal for each year in the three-year vesting period for the performanceperformance-based RSUs granted in 2014.2017:

 

   Maximum Normalized FFO
Required for Vesting of Tranche
During the Three-Year Period
   Vesting of Tranche at End of Three-Year
Period Based on Performance
for the Year  Specified
 

Period/Tranche

    50% Vesting   75% Vesting   100% Vesting 

2014

  $2.44    $2.01    $2.21    $2.44  

2015

  $2.56    $2.01    $2.24    $2.51  

2016

  $2.69    $2.01    $2.26    $2.59  

Period/Tranche

 

Normalized FFO

Required for

Vesting of Tranche

Each Year

 

2017

 

$

1.70

 

2018

 

$

1.74

 

2019

 

$

1.78

 

Outstanding Performance-Based RSUs Granted in 2016.In 2013, given our transition to REIT status,2016, we granted only time-based RSUs.performance-based RSUs that are subject to the same vesting principles as the performance-based RSUs granted in 2018. The table below sets forth the Normalized FFOperformance goal for each year in the three-year vesting period for the performance-based RSUs granted in 2016:

Period/Tranche

 

Normalized FFO

Required for

Vesting of Tranche

Each Year

 

2016

 

$

2.25

 

2017

 

$

2.31

 

2018

 

$

2.38

 

Vested Performance-basedVesting of Performance-Based RSUs Based on 20152018 Performance.Based on our normalized FFO per share of $2.69 for 2015, the tranche of the 2015 and 2014 performance-based RSUs that could vest based on 2015 performance, all vested, representing one third of the shares granted, as As set forth in the table below.below, as a result of our Normalized FFO of $2.31 for 2018, the tranche for outstanding performance-based RSUs granted in 2016 did not vest and was forfeited, while the performance‑based RSUs granted in 2017 and 2018 vested. In accordance with the terms of the awards, the vesting occurs and shares are issued on the later of (i) delivery of the audited financial statements by the Company’s certified independent registered public accountants for the applicable fiscal year (in the Company’s filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K) and (ii) the applicable anniversary of the grant date. Thus, the tranche of the 2014 and 2015 Performance- based RSUs that vested based on 2015 performance were deemed vested, and the shares were issued, on February 25, 2016.

 

Name

  2015 Performance-based RSUs
that Vested based on 2015

Performance  and Issued in 2016
   2014 Performance-based RSUs
that Vested based on 2015

Performance  and Issued in 2016
 

 

2018

Performance-Based

RSUs that Vested

based on 2018

Performance and

Issued in 2019

 

 

2017

Performance-Based

RSUs that Vested

based on 2018

Performance and

Issued in 2019

 

 

2016

Performance-Based

RSUs that Vested

based on 2018

Performance and

Issued in 2019

 

Damon T. Hininger

   16,123     20,031  

Damon T. Hininger(1)

 

 

33,071

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

David M. Garfinkle

   7,762     9,632  

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

10,535

 

 

 

 

Harley G. Lappin

   7,762     9,644  

Patrick D. Swindle

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

6,250

 

 

 

 

Anthony L. Grande

   7,762     9,644  

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

10,535

 

 

 

 

Steven E. Groom

   6,393     7,942  

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

8,676

 

 

 

 

(1)

In support of the cost reduction plan we announced in 2016, Mr. Hininger voluntarily forfeited the 70,817 performance-based RSUs awarded to him in 2016, and, at Mr. Hininger’s request, our Compensation Committee did not award him any performance-based RSUs in 2017.


Dividend Equivalent Rights. The performance-based RSUs and time-based RSUs have associated dividend equivalent rights that are earned based on cash dividends paid by the Company while the award is unvested and outstanding. The Dividend Equivalent Rightsdividend equivalent rights are paid in cash, and do not vest and are not paid until, and then only to the extent, the associated performance-based RSUs or time-based RSUs vest and the underlying shares are issued. This further aligns the executive officer’s interests with our stockholders, encourages dividend growth performance and does not result in any unearned compensation.

Non-Direct Compensation

Non-Direct Compensation

Severance and Change in Control Benefits

We believe that reasonable severance and change in control benefits are necessary in order to recruit and retain effective senior managers. These severance benefits reflect the fact that it may be difficult for such executives to find comparable employment within a short period of time and are a product of a generally competitive recruiting environment within our industry. We also believe that a change in control arrangement will provide an executive security that will likely reduce any reluctance of an executive to pursue a change in control transaction that could be in the best interests of our stockholders. In addition, we have sought to maintain a high level of consistency in the contractual terms applicable to all members of the executive team. We maintain employment agreements with each of our executive officers that provide cash severance equal to their currentthen-current annual base salary for terminationstermination of employment by the Company without cause,“cause” or resignation for “good reason,” and a double trigger payment of 2.99 times their base salary, plus certain other benefits, in the event of termination of employment by the Company (other than forwithout “cause”) or resignation for “good reason” in connection with a “change in control”.control.”

The executive employment agreements and the potential costs in the event of a change in control are reviewed periodically by theour Compensation Committee, and the Committeewhich stays abreast of developments and suggested best practices in compensation structure and design. The executive employment agreements were set to expire in December 2014. In 2014,2017, we undertook a comprehensive review of the provisions of the executive employment agreements (including protections provided in the event of a change in control, and compliance with applicable law)law and on December 30, 2014provisions related to post-termination non-competition, non-solicitation, confidentiality and non-disclosure) and, effective January 1, 2018, we entered into new or revised employment agreements with each of our executives on substantially similar economic terms, updatingthen‑current senior executives. The new employment agreements provide for an initial term expiring December 31, 2020, with automatic renewal for an additional year absent notice of nonrenewal by the minimumCompany or the executive, update the base salary payable underof the agreementexecutive to equal the salary levels in effect for 2014,current amount, eliminate the accrual of paid vacation benefits and updatingupdate post-termination covenants to enhance protections to the provisions toCompany and ensure compliance with applicable law, including Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.law.

Under our equity award agreements, all outstanding equity awards would accelerate upon a change in control. TheOur Compensation Committee believes that the single trigger equity acceleration encourages management to stay committed towards any potential transaction that may be in the best interests of our stockholders. For a detailed discussion of potential severance and change in control benefits, see “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control,” beginning on page 4051 of this Proxy Statement.

Perquisites and Other Benefits

The Company has previously paid relocation expenses, either in the form of reimbursement or a lump sum payment, to the NEOs who have relocated to Nashville, Tennessee in order to assume their positions with the Company. We permit limited tax gross up payments to our executives to cover the income tax associated with the taxable portions (if any) of such relocation reimbursement payments. No such relocation and tax gross up payments were made to the named executive officers during 2015.

The named executive officersNEOs are also eligible for benefits generally available to and on the same terms as the Company’s employees who are exempt for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act, including health insurance, short-term disability insurance dental insurance and group lifedental insurance. Additionally, the Company pays supplemental life and long-term disability insurance premiums for the named executive officers.NEOs. Pursuant to their employment agreements and in order to encourage community involvement, the named executive officers are also eligible for reimbursement for certain civic and professional memberships that are approved in advance. We also pay for physicals for executive officers up to $2,000 per individual on an annual basis.basis and reimburse our NEOs for certain wellness memberships.


Retirement Plans

The Company maintains a qualified 401(k) plan. The Company matches a percentage of eligible employee contributions to our qualified 401(k) Plan. Employer matching contributions are made in cash on a dollar-for-dollar basis up to 5% of the employee’s base salary and are 100% vested immediately.

The Company also hasmaintains a nonqualified deferred compensation plan covering our executive officers and certain key employees.employees (the “Executive Deferred Compensation Plan”). Under the terms of the deferred compensation plan,Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, participants are allowedeligible to defer up to 50% of their annual base salary and 100% of their incentive cash bonus each plan year. The Company, in its discretion, may make matching contributions to the plan. Currently, the Company makes matching contributions equal to 100% of amounts deferred up to 5% of total cash compensation. The matching contribution is credited on a monthly basis, but is reduced at the end of the plan year for any matching amounts contributed to the participant’s 401(k) account. Any compensation deferred and matching contributions, if any, earn a return based on a fixed rate that is established by the Company based on the return received by the Company on certain investments designated as a funding mechanism for meeting its obligations under the plan. Participants are 100% vested in amounts deferred under the deferred compensation planExecutive Deferred Compensation Plan and earnings on those amounts, while the matching contributions vest 20% after two years of service, 40% after three years of service, 80% after four years of service and 100% after five years of service, subject to accelerated vesting in the event of a change in control, death, disability or retirement (age 62).

Guidelines and Policies

Guidelines and Policies

Executive Officer Stock Ownership Guidelines

Since March 1, 2007, we have maintainedWe maintain stock ownership guidelines applicable to our executive officers and non-executive directors. The stock ownership guidelines are designed to align the economic interests of executive officers and directorsour Board with those of stockholders and to discourage excessive risk-taking by management and directors.

The original Under these guidelines, provided thateach of our executive officers areis expected to own a fixed number of shares of the Company’s common stock of the Company, as set forth in the table below. This fixed number equalsequal to three times such executive officer’s base salary on theirhis or her hire or promotion date divided by the Company’s closing common stock price, as reported onby the NYSE, on such date. The original guidelines also provided that the Company’s non-executive directorsExecutive officers are expected to own a fixed number of shares of common stock of the Company equal to four times such director’s annual retainer (excluding any retainer for chairing or serving as a member of a committee) in effect as of March 1, 2012 or their later date of initial election or appointment to the Board, divided by the Company’s closing common stock price, as reported on the NYSE, on such date.

The stock ownership guidelines applicable to our executive officers and our non-executive directors were amended by our Board in May 2013 to increase the number of shares the directors and officers of the Company are expected to own to give effect to the REIT conversion special dividend.

Executive officers and non-executive directors are required to achieve these ownership levels, subject to a limited hardship exemption, within five years following their date of hire or promotion, or initial appointment or election, as applicable, or (in the case of those serving at the time the guidelines were adopted) by March 1, 2012.promotion.

The following may berules are used in determining share ownership:

ownership of our executive officers and directors under the guidelines:

shares of common stock owned outright by the executive officer or non-executive director and his or her immediate family members who share the same household, whether held individually or jointly;

shares of restricted stock or restricted stock unitsRSUs where the restrictions have lapsed, even though such shares may be subject to an election made by the holder to defer receipt of the shares; and

shares held in trusts or other legal entities established for estate planning purposes with respect to which the executive officer or non-executive director retains beneficial ownership (due to complexities of these arrangements, requests to include shares held in such arrangements must be reviewed and approved by theour Compensation Committee).

The guidelines were based, in part, on information provided by PwC that summarized the frequencyexistence of such programs at Fortune 500 companies and reported on the most common types of such programs. Based on such research, theour Board of Directors determined thatthe ownership requirements were fair, yet challenging, ownership requirements and that five years was a reasonable time period during which executives and directors would be able to comply. The CommitteeOur Board believes that these ownership guidelines encourage executive officers and directors of the Company, and the Board to act in the long-term interests of our stockholders, while discouraging excessive risk-taking.


Our guidelines and the compliance status of the Company’s named executive officersour NEOs as of the last quarterly review date of February 2, 201620, 2019 are shown in the table below.below:

 

Name

  Shares Required by
Guidelines
   Number of Shares
Held
   Compliance Date 

 

Shares

Required

by Guidelines

 

Number of

Shares

Held

 

Compliance

Deadline

Damon T. Hininger

   87,138     162,245     10/15/2014  

 

87,138

 

224,758

 

10/15/2014

David M. Garfinkle

   32,777     48,927     5/1/2019  

 

32,777

 

102,417

 

5/1/2019

Harley G. Lappin

   47,759     61,177     6/1/2016  

Patrick D. Swindle

 

53,119

 

7,443

 

1/1/2023(1)

Anthony L. Grande

   35,671     39,856     8/21/2013  

 

35,671

 

55,438

 

8/21/2013

Steven E. Groom

   39,751     61,967     4/22/2015  

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

22,340

 

59,258

 

11/01/2018

(1)

Mr. Swindle first became subject to the stock ownership guidelines beginning January 1, 2018, with a five-year compliance period.

Grant Timing Policy

To ensure that our equity compensation awards are granted appropriately, we have the following practices regarding the timing of equity compensation grants and for stock option exercise price determinations:

Grants of equity awards for executive officers are typically made on the date of the February Compensation Committee meeting, after theour Compensation Committee has had the opportunity to review full year results for the prior year and consider anticipated results for the current year.

Our Compensation Committee occasionally approves additional equity awards in certain special circumstances, such as upon an executive officer’s initial employment with the Company, the promotion of an executive officer to a new position or in recognition of special contributions made by an executive officer. For grants to executive officers, all such grants are approved by our Compensation Committee with an effective date of grant on or after the date of such approval. If the grant date is after the date of approval, it is on a date that is specified by our Compensation Committee at the time of approval.

The Committee occasionally approves additional equity awards in certain special circumstances, such as upon an executive officer’s initial employment with the Company, the promotion of an executive officer to a new position or in recognition of special contributions made by an executive officer. For grants to executive officers, all such grants are approved by the Committee with an effective date of grant on or after the date of such approval. If the grant date is after the date of approval, it is on a date that is specified by the Committee at the time of approval.

The Company strives to ensure that equity grants are made following the public release of important information such as year-end results or anticipated results for the succeeding year.

Deductibility of Executive Compensation

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 limits the deductibility on the Company’s tax returndeductibility of compensation over $1.0 million paid to the Chief Executive Officer, or any of the other four most highlyChief Financial Officer and the three highest compensated executive officers (other than the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer) serving at the end of each fiscal year. Prior to the fiscal year unless, in general, a significant portionenactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1) (the “TCJA”) on December 22, 2017, which is effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, the Section 162(m) limit on deductible compensation did not apply to compensation that constituted “qualified performance-based compensation” or that was paid to our Chief Financial Officer. To meet this exception for performance-based compensation, all of the following criteria must have been met:

the compensation is contingent on the attainment of one or more pre-established, objective performance goals;

the performance goals are set by our Compensation Committee;

the plan pursuant to a plan which the performance-based compensation is performance-related, non-discretionary,determined is disclosed to and has been approved by our stockholders. Thestockholders before the compensation is paid; and

our Compensation Committee’s actions with respect to
Section 162(m)Committee certifies in 2015writing that the performance goals and any other material terms of the performance-based compensation were to makesatisfied.

Where applicable, our Compensation Committee has made reasonable efforts to ensure that compensation was deductible to the extent permittedCompany’s performance‑based awards constituted “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) while simultaneously providing appropriate rewards for performance. The Committee intends to structure performance-based compensation awarded in the future to executive officers who may be subject to Section 162(m) in a manner that satisfies the relevant requirements. The Committee,actual performance; however, reserves the authority to award non-deductible compensation as deemed appropriate. Further, because of ambiguities and uncertainties as to the application and interpretation of Section 162(m) and related regulations, no assurance can be given that compensation intended to satisfy the requirements for deductibility under Section 162(m) willdid in fact do


so.

Additionally, the Compensation Committee continues to believe that stockholder interests are best served if we retain discretion and flexibility in awarding compensation to our NEOs, even where the compensation paid under such programs may not be fully deductible; thus the Compensation Committee has approved and will continue to approve, the payment of compensation outside of the deductibility limitations of Section 162(m).

As a result of the enactment of the TCJA, the exception to allow the full deductibility of “qualified performance-based compensation” will no longer apply to compensation paid after January 1, 2018, unless paid pursuant to a written binding contract in effect on or before November 2, 2017, such as certain long-term equity incentive compensation awards that the Compensation Committee granted in 2017. The Compensation Committee will continue to retain the flexibility to design and maintain the Company’s executive compensation programs in a manner that is most beneficial to the Company’s stockholders, including the payment of compensation that may not be deductible under Section 162(m).


Report of the CompensationCompensation Committee

The following Report of the Compensation Committee does not constitute soliciting material and should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any other Company filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent the Company specifically incorporates this Report by reference therein.

Our Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis set forth above with our management. Taking this review and discussion into account, the undersigned Committee members recommended to theour Board of Directors that theour Board approve the inclusion of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in our Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A for filing with the SEC.

Submitted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors:Committee:

Joseph V. Russell,Donna M. Alvarado, Chair

Robert J. Dennis

Mark A. Emkes

John R. Prann, Jr.


Summary CompensationCompensation Table

The following table summarizes the compensation earned or paid to our named executive officersNamed Executive Officers for service in the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, with the exception of Mr. Garfinkle,Ms. Mayberry, who first became a named executive officerNamed Executive Officer in 2014.2017 and Mr. Swindle, who first became a Named Executive Officer in 2018:

 

Name and Principal Position

 

Year

 

Salary

($)

 

 

Stock

Awards

($) (1)

 

 

Non-Equity

Incentive Plan

Compensation

($) (2)

 

 

Change in

Nonqualified

Deferred

Compensation

Earnings ($) (3)

 

 

All Other

Compensation

($) (4)

 

 

Total

($)

 

Damon T. Hininger

 

2018

 

$

926,350

 

 

$

2,145,977

 

 

$

883,997

 

 

$

30,115

 

 

$

131,230

 

 

$

4,117,669

 

President and Chief Executive

 

2017

 

$

886,830

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,390,476

 

 

$

32,303

 

 

$

64,048

 

 

$

2,373,657

 

Officer

 

2016

 

$

861,000

 

 

$

2,043,779

 

 

$

86,100

 

 

$

29,355

 

 

$

80,964

 

 

$

3,101,198

 

David M. Garfinkle

 

2018

 

$

455,344

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

 

$

434,526

 

 

$

7,069

 

 

$

47,097

 

 

$

1,977,215

 

Executive Vice  President and

 

2017

 

$

408,285

 

 

$

1,033,167

 

 

$

640,157

 

 

$

7,688

 

 

$

37,312

 

 

$

2,126,609

 

Chief Financial Officer

 

2016

 

$

387,000

 

 

$

983,982

 

 

$

38,700

 

 

$

6,930

 

 

$

42,145

 

 

$

1,458,757

 

Patrick D. Swindle

 

2018

 

$

413,334

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

 

$

394,436

 

 

$

 

 

$

22,321

 

 

$

1,863,270

 

Executive Vice President and

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chief Corrections Officer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anthony L. Grande

 

2018

 

$

463,023

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

 

$

441,853

 

 

$

16,778

 

 

$

70,031

 

 

$

2,024,864

 

Executive Vice President and

 

2017

 

$

424,452

 

 

$

1,033,167

 

 

$

665,506

 

 

$

18,368

 

 

$

36,492

 

 

$

2,177,985

 

Chief Development Officer

 

2016

 

$

412,089

 

 

$

983,982

 

 

$

41,209

 

 

$

16,901

 

 

$

44,588

 

 

$

1,498,769

 

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

2018

 

$

413,334

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

 

$

394,436

 

 

$

6,367

 

 

$

25,563

 

 

$

1,872,879

 

Executive Vice President,

 

2017

 

$

346,310

 

 

$

850,855

 

 

$

542,985

 

 

$

7,667

 

 

$

22,999

 

 

$

1,770,816

 

Real Estate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name and Principal

Position(1)

YearSalary
($)
Stock
Awards
($)(2)
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
($)(3)
Change in
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings ($)(4)
All Other
Compensation
($)(5)
Total
($)

Damon T. Hininger
President and Chief Executive Officer


2015

2014

2013


$

$

$

882,807

811,231

737,231


$

$

$

1,946,449

1,946,477

1,853,782


$

$

$

450,232

822,750

344,066


$

$

$

25,148

14,533

20,910


$

$

$

100,681

71,126

326,471


$

$

$

3,405,317

3,666,117

3,282,460


David M. Garfinkle (1)
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


2015

2014


$

$

387,347

323,013


$

$

937,109

937,127


$

$

197,547

287,070


$

$

5,697

3,073


$

$

41,738

26,124


$

$

1,569,438

1,576,407


Harley G. Lappin
Executive Vice President and Chief Corrections Officer


2015

2014

2013


$

$

$

422,527

377,434

332,673


$

$

$

937,109

937,140

892,490


$

$

$

215,489

382,793

155,258


$

$

$

4,347

2,343

3,449


$

$

$

55,789

39,727

130,836


$

$

$

1,635,261

1,739,437

1,514,706


Anthony L. Grande
Executive Vice President and Chief Development Officer


2015

2014

2013


$

$

$

422,527

377,434

332,673


$

$

$

937,109

937,140

892,490


$

$

$

215,489

382,793

155,258


$

$

$

14,793

8,837

13,176


$

$

$

49,941

33,911

161,264


$

$

$

1,639,859

1,740,115

1,554,861


Steven E. Groom
Executive Vice President and General Counsel


2015

2014

2013


$

$

$

335,736

308,233

282,319


$

$

$

771,763

771,757

735,009


$

$

$

171,225

312,610

131,758



—  

—  

—  


$

$

$

29,102

28,852

138,599


$

$

$

1,307,826

1,421,452

1,287,685


(1)Mr. Garfinkle was appointed as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer effective as of May 1, 2014. Compensation reported is for the full 2014 fiscal year.
(2)The amounts shown in this column represent the aggregate grant-date fair value of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) and performance-based RSUs granted during the given year calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. Performance-based RSUs granted in 2014 and 2015 vest based upon achieving normalized FFO performance objectives that were pre-established by theour Compensation Committee. Time-based RSUs granted in 2013 vest in 1/3rd increments per year commencing with the first anniversary of the grant date. The grant date values for the 20152018 performance-based RSUs presented reflect the probable outcome that the performance conditions will be met as estimated on the date of grant. At the time of grant for the 20152018 performance-based RSUs, it was determined that maximum performance under the performance condition was the probable outcome, and thus the grant date fair value was determined based on $40.24$21.63 per share (reflecting such probability) multiplied by the maximum number of shares that may vest, which equates to the number granted. All grants of equity awards were made under the Company’s 2008 Plan and are subject to individual award agreements. RSUs, including our performance-based RSUs earn dividend equivalent rights that accumulate and are paid in cash when and only to the extent the underlying award vests. In support of the cost reduction plan announced by the Company on September 27, 2016, Mr. Hininger voluntarily forfeited the 70,817 performance-based RSUs awarded to him on February 19, 2016, and requested that our Compensation Committee not award him any equity-based compensation in 2017.

(3)

(2)

The amounts shown in this column reflect cash incentive plan compensation earned pursuant to the Company’s Cash Incentive Plan, which is discussedannual cash incentive plan. A detailed discussion of the amounts paid in further detail2018 begins on page 2937 under the heading “Annual Cash Incentive Plan Compensation” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this Proxy Statement.

(4)

(3)

The amounts shown in this column represent above-market earnings on amounts that the named executive officersNamed Executive Officer chose to defer pursuant to the Company’s Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (“DCP”), which is more fully described on page 50 under the heading “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation.Compensation in 2018.” Amounts shown are based on the excess of the Company’s fixed rate for 20152018 of 5.60%, and5.00% over 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate, with compounding (as prescribed under section 1274(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, (26 U.S.C. 1274(d)))Code) of 3.29%3.16%.

(5)

(4)

The amounts shown as All Other Compensation for 20152018 include the following:

 

Name

  401(k) Plan
Matching
Contributions
   DCP Matching
Contributions
   Life
Insurance
Premiums
   Long Term
Disability
Premiums (a) 
 

 

401(k) Plan

Matching

Contributions

 

 

DCP Matching

Contributions

 

 

Life Insurance

Premiums

 

 

Long-Term

Disability

Premiums (a)

 

Damon T. Hininger

  $13,250    $72,028    $2,399    $13,004  

 

$

13,750

 

 

$

102,091

 

 

$

2,385

 

 

$

13,004

 

David M. Garfinkle

  $13,250    $20,471    $2,764    $5,253  

 

$

13,750

 

 

$

17,553

 

 

$

3,680

 

 

$

12,114

 

Harley G. Lappin

  $13,250    $25,876    $7,412    $9,251  

Patrick D. Swindle

 

$

13,748

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,980

 

 

$

6,593

 

Anthony L. Grande

  $13,250    $27,016    $2,273    $7,402  

 

$

13,750

 

 

$

42,676

 

 

$

2,542

 

 

$

11,063

 

Steven E. Groom

  $13,250     —      $8,529    $7,323  

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

$

13,250

 

 

$

 

 

$

2,487

 

 

$

9,826

 

 

(a)

(a)

The Company pays the long long‑term disability premiums of its executive officers and certain other employees, but does not pay such premiums for all employees.


Grants of Plan-BasedPlan-Based Awards in 20152018  

The following table sets forth the grants of plan-based awards that were made to the named executive officersNamed Executive Officers during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015. No options were granted to our named executive officers in 2015.2018:

 

 

 

 

Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-

Equity Incentive Plan Awards(1)

 

 

Estimated Possible Payouts Under

Equity Incentive Plan Awards(2)

 

Name

  Grant
Date
   Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-
Equity Incentive Plan Awards(1)
   

Estimated Possible Payouts Under

Equity Incentive Plan Awards(2)

   Grant Date Fair
Value of Stock
Awards ($)(3)
 

 

Grant

Date

 

Minimum

 

 

Target

 

 

Maximum

 

 

Threshold

 

 

Target

 

 

Maximum

 

 

Grant Date Fair

Value of RSU

Awards ($) (3)

 

  Threshold   Target   Maximum   Threshold   Target Maximum   

Damon T. Hininger

   2/19/2015           16,124     (2 48,371    $1,946,449  

 

2/21/2018

 

$

157,480

 

 

$

694,763

 

 

$

1,621,113

 

 

 

33,071

 

 

 

(2

)

 

 

99,213

 

 

$

2,145,977

 

   2/19/2015    $44,140    $662,105    $1,765,614         

David M. Garfinkle

   2/19/2015           7,763     (2 23,288    $937,109  

 

2/21/2018

 

$

77,408

 

 

$

341,508

 

 

$

796,852

 

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

(2

)

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

   2/19/2015    $19,367    $290,510    $774,694         

Harley G. Lappin

   2/19/2015           7,763     (2 23,288    $937,109  
   2/19/2015    $21,126    $316,895    $845,054         

Patrick D. Swindle

 

2/21/2018

 

$

70,267

 

 

$

310,001

 

 

$

723,335

 

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

(2

)

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

Anthony L. Grande

   2/19/2015           7,763     (2 23,288    $937,109  

 

2/21/2018

 

$

78,714

 

 

$

347,267

 

 

$

810,290

 

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

(2

)

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

   2/19/2015    $21,126    $316,895    $845,054         

Steven E. Groom

   2/19/2015           6,393     (2 19,179    $771,763  
   2/19/2015    $16,787    $251,802    $671,472         

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

2/21/2018

 

$

70,267

 

 

$

310,001

 

 

$

723,335

 

 

 

15,922

 

 

 

(2

)

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

1,033,179

 

 

(1)

(1)

The amounts shown in these columns reflect the threshold (5%minimum (17.00% of actualbase salary), target (75%(75.00% of actualbase salary) and maximum (200%(175.00% of actualbase salary) amounts that each of the named executive officersNamed Executive Officers could have earned for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20152018 pursuant to the Company’s 2015 Cash Incentive Plan,annual cash incentive plan, based on positive Adjusted EPS, Normalized FFO, Adjusted EBITDA and normalized FFO per share,strategic business goals, as discussed in further detail on page 2937 under the heading “Annual Cash Incentive Plan Compensation” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this Proxy Statement. The amounts actually awarded to each of the named executive officers are reflected in the Summary Compensation Table.

(2)

(2)

The amounts shown in these columnsthe threshold column reflect as threshold, the minimum number (or 1/3rd of the granted amount) of performance-based RSUs that could vest if only one tranche of the performance-based RSUs achieve the normalizedNormalized FFO performance goals. Maximum reflects vesting in full of all of the performance-based RSUs granted, which occurs when maximum performance under the normalizedNormalized FFO per share performance goals is achieved for each of 2015, 20162018, 2019 and 2017,2020, resulting in the vesting of each of the three tranches following each such year. Target is not established, as vesting may range from 1/3rd, 2/3rdrd or 100% of the number of performance-based RSUs granted. The performance-based RSUs were awarded pursuant to the Company’s 2008 Plan and have dividend equivalent rights payable in cash, but only to the extent and when the performance-based RSUs vest and the underlying shares are issued. The performance-based RSUs are discussed in further detail beginning on page 3140 under the heading “Performance-Based Equity Incentive Compensation” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this Proxy Statement.

(3)

(3)

The amounts shown in this column represent the aggregate grant-date fair value of the performance–based RSUs granted in 20152018 calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. These awards vest in 1/3rd increments based upon achieving normalizedNormalized FFO per share performance objectivesgoals that were pre-established by theour Compensation Committee. At the time of grant for the 20152018 performance-based RSUs, it was determined that maximum performance under the performance condition was the probable outcome, and thus the grant date fair value was determined based on $40.24$21.63 per share for the February 19, 201521, 2018 grants (reflecting such probability) multiplied by the maximum number of shares that may vest, which equates to the number of performance-based RSUs granted.

Employment Agreements

On December 30, 2014,Effective January 1, 2018, the Company entered into new employment agreements with each of our named executive officers,NEOs, which replaced the existing employment agreements, thatmost of which were scheduled to expire on December 31, 2014.2018. Each agreement is effective as of January 1, 2015 and has ana two-year initial term, that expires on December 31, 2015,and is subject to twoone automatic one-year renewalsrenewal unless either party provides notice of non-renewal at least 60 days in advance of the expiration of the then currentinitial term. Each of the employment agreements for our named executed officers has automatically renewed. Each of these agreements provides for a minimum annual salary that is consistent with the base salary in effect on December 30, 2014.salary. In addition, during the term, the executives are eligible to participate in all compensation or employee benefit plans or programs maintained by the Company for the benefit of its salaried employees or senior executives from time to time. These plans and programs may include health and life insurance. In addition, during the term, these agreements provide for reimbursement for certain professional and civic memberships that are approved in advance by the Company. Each of the employment agreements, continued theprovides for severance benefits, and provisions that were in effect under the previous agreements and which are more fully discussed under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”Control” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this Proxy Statement.


Outstanding Equity Awards at 20152018 Fiscal Year-End

The following table sets forth information concerning (1) options (2) unvested time-based RSUs and (3) unearned performance-based RSUs for each of the named executive officersNamed Executive Officers that were outstanding as of December 31, 2015. The following2018:

 

 

Option Awards (1)

 

RSU Awards

 

Name

 

Number of

Securities

Underlying

Unexercised

Options (#)

Exercisable

 

 

Number of

Securities

Underlying

Unexercised

Options (#)

Unexercisable

 

Option

Exercise

Price ($)

 

 

Option

Expiration

Date

 

Number of

Unearned

Shares, Units

or Other

Rights That

Have Not

Vested (#)(2)

 

 

Market or

Payout

Value of

Unearned

Shares,

Units or

Other

Rights That

Have Not

Vested ($)(2)

 

Damon T. Hininger

 

 

126,924

 

 

 

 

$

17.57

 

 

2/18/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

107,298

 

 

 

 

$

20.78

 

 

2/23/2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

139,273

 

 

 

 

$

22.34

 

 

3/16/2022

 

 

99,213

 

 

$

1,768,968

 

David M. Garfinkle

 

 

16,314

 

 

 

 

$

20.78

 

 

2/23/2021

 

 

21,070

 

 

$

375,678

 

 

 

 

21,175

 

 

 

 

$

22.34

 

 

3/16/2022

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

851,668

 

Patrick D. Swindle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12,502

 

 

$

222,911

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

851,668

 

Anthony L. Grande

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21,070

 

 

$

375,678

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

851,668

 

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

 

21,175

 

 

 

 

$

22.34

 

 

3/16/2022

 

 

17,352

 

 

$

309,386

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

47,766

 

 

$

851,668

 

(1)

Option awards reflect (a) the equitable and proportionate adjustments made to our outstanding options as a result of the REIT conversion special dividend of $6.66 per share paid in May 2013, resulting in an increase in the outstanding number of options and a corresponding reduction in the exercise price, and (b) the dividend equivalents that were awarded as a result of the REIT conversion special dividend on the then outstanding RSUs.

   Option Awards   Stock Awards 

Name

  Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#)
Exercisable
   Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#)
Unexercisable (1)
   Option
Exercise
Price ($)
   Option
Expiration
Date
   Number of
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested(2)
   Market
Value of
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested(2)
   Number of
Unearned
Shares, Units
or Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested (#)
  Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested ($)
 
                   Time-based RSUs   Performance-based RSUs 

Damon T. Hininger

   13,409      $22.57     2/16/2017     19,588    $518,886     40,064 (3)  $1,061,295 (3) 
   38,112      $22.72     2/20/2018         48,371 (3)  $1,281,348 (3) 
   14,027      $24.00     8/14/2018         
   35,324      $17.38     8/13/2019         
   126,924      $17.57     2/18/2020         
   107,298      $20.78     2/23/2021         
   139,273      $22.34     3/16/2022         

David M. Garfinkle

   11,345      $12.14     2/15/2016     2,979    $78,914     19,264 (3)  $510,303 (3) 
   13,409      $22.57     2/16/2017         23,288 (3)  $616,899 (3) 
   16,008      $22.72     2/20/2018         
   24,012      $9.13     2/18/2019         
   19,385      $17.57     2/18/2020         
   16,314      $20.78     2/23/2021         
   15,881     5,294    $22.34     3/16/2022         

Harley G. Lappin

           9,432    $249,854     

 

19,289

23,288

 (3) 

 (3) 

 $

$

510,966

616,899

 (3) 

 (3) 

Anthony L. Grande

           9,432    $249,854     

 

19,289

23,288

 (3) 

 (3) 

 $

$

510,966

616,899

 (3) 

 (3) 

Steven E. Groom

   4,907      $22.34     3/16/2022     7,768    $205,774     

 

15,885

19,179

 (3) 

 (3) 

 $

$

420,794

508,052

 (3) 

 (3) 

(1)Mr. Garfinkle’s unvested options granted in 2012 vested March 16, 2016.
(2)Time-based RSUs were granted in 2013 vest in substantially equal one-third annual increments commencing on the anniversary of the grant date of February 21, 2013. Value shown is based on the number of outstanding time-based unvested RSUs and dividend equivalents awarded as a result of theour REIT conversion special dividend multiplied byof $6.66 per share paid in May 2013, resulting in an increase in the closing stock priceoutstanding number of our common stock on December 31, 2015 of $26.49.options and a corresponding reduction in the exercise price.

(3)

(2)

Performance-based RSUs granted in 20142016, 2017 and 20152018 vest and are thus earned based upon achieving goals for normalizedNormalized FFO per sharegoals that are pre-established by theour Compensation Committee, with 1/3rd of the amount granted being earned and vested per year if we achieve maximum performance under the Normalized FFO per share goal for that year. ForIf the RSUs granted in 2014, if maximum performanceNormalized FFO goal for that year is not achieved, then the 1/3rd tranche iswould not vestedvest and is subject to vesting in the subsequent year or at the end of the three year performance period based on performance against pre-established goals. For the RSUs granted in 2015, if maximum performance is not achieved, then the 1/3rd tranche is not vested and is forfeited forever.forfeited.  Based on our achieving maximum performance under the normalizedNormalized FFO goalof $2.31 for 2015,2018, 1/3rd of the 20142017 and 20152018 performance-based RSUs vested, however,vested.  However, the 2018 1/3rd tranche of the 2016 performance-based RSUs did not vest and was forfeited. The vesting date does not occur until delivery of the audited financial statements by the Company’s certified independent registered public accountants for the respective fiscal year, or one yearone-year anniversary of the grant date, whichever is later. ThisAs a result, this table thus includes (a) the 1/3rd tranche of 20142017 performance-based RSUs that vested in February 20162019 based on 20152018 performance and (b) the 1/3rd tranche of 20152018 performance-based RSUs that vested in February 20162019 based on 20152018 performance.  This table also includes the remaining 1/3rd tranches that vest based on 20162019 and 20172020 performance, as applicable. For further discussion of the performance-based restricted stock units,RSUs, see “Performance-Based Equity Incentive Compensation” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this Proxy Statement.

Option Exercises and Stock Vested in 20152018  

The following table sets forth information regarding the exercise of stock options and the vesting of RSUs and performance-based RSUs during the fiscal year ended December 31, 20152018 for each of the named executive officers.Named Executive Officers.

 

  Option Awards   Stock Awards 

 

Option Awards

 

 

RSU Awards

 

Name

  Number of Shares
Acquired on
Exercise (#)
   Value Realized
on Exercise ($) (1)
   Number of Shares
Acquired on
Vesting (#)
   Value Realized
on Vesting
($)(2)
 

 

Number of

Shares

Acquired on

Exercise (#)

 

 

Value Realized

on Exercise ($) (1)

 

 

Number of

Shares

Acquired on

Vesting (#)

 

 

Value Realized

on Vesting ($) (2)

 

Damon T. Hininger

   6,612    $189,500     52,744    $2,117,736  

 

 

49,351

 

 

$

323,716

 

 

 

 

 

$

 

David M. Garfinkle

   —��      —       14,606    $585,913  

 

 

29,405

 

 

$

228,928

 

 

 

21,900

 

 

$

474,573

 

Harley G. Lappin

   67,053    $1,299,487     25,393    $1,019,560  

Patrick D. Swindle

 

 

 

 

$

 

 

 

9,839

 

 

$

213,211

 

Anthony L. Grande

   22,351    $384,198     25,393    $1,019,560  

 

 

 

 

$

 

 

 

21,900

 

 

$

474,573

 

Steven E. Groom

   13,500    $119,753     20,912    $839,642  

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

 

 

 

$

 

 

 

18,035

 

 

$

390,818

 

 

(1)

(1)

The value realized upon exercise of stock options reflects the price at which shares acquired upon exercise of the stock options were sold or valued for income tax purposes, net of the exercise price for acquiring such shares.


(2)

(2)

The value realized on vesting of RSUs and performance-based RSUs was calculated as the product of the closing price of a share of our common stock on the vesting date, multiplied by the number of units vested plus dividend equivalents awarded as a result of the REIT conversion special dividend.. The performance-based RSUs that vestedwere granted to NEOs in 2015 were earneddid not vest, as the Company did not achieve the applicable Normalized FFO target for that yearʼs grant. The performance‑based RSUs granted to NEOs in 2016 and 2017 vested based on ourthe achievement of maximum Adjusted EPS goal astarget Normalized FFO levels established for each of December 31, 2014 and FFO per share goals for 2014. Also includes time based RSUs that vested in 2015.those grants.

Nonqualified Deferred Compensation in 20152018

The following table sets forth information concerning contributions made by the named executive officersNamed Executive Officers and the Company pursuant to the Company’s Executive Deferred Compensation Plan as well as aggregate individual account balances as of December 31, 2015.2018:

 

Name

  Executive
Contributions
In 2015(1)
   Registrant
Contributions in
2015(2)
   Aggregate
Earnings
In 2015 (3)
   Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions
In 2015
  Aggregate Balance
at 12/31/2015(4)
 

 

Executive

Contributions

in 2018 (1)

 

 

Company

Contributions

in 2018 (2)

 

 

Aggregate

Earnings

in 2018 (3)

 

 

Aggregate

Withdrawals/

Distributions

in 2018

 

 

Aggregate

Balance at

12/31/2018 (4)

 

Damon T. Hininger

  $76,450    $72,028    $60,965    —    $1,206,991  

 

$

106,578

 

 

$

102,091

 

 

$

81,833

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,821,729

 

David M. Garfinkle

  $33,721    $20,471    $13,810    —    $284,612  

 

$

12,803

 

 

$

17,553

 

 

$

19,209

 

 

$

 

 

$

416,239

 

Harley G. Lappin

  $21,126    $25,876    $10,539    —    $232,594  

Anthony L. Grande

  $40,266    $27,016    $35,863    —    $703,759  

 

$

56,426

 

 

$

42,676

 

 

$

45,592

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,011,260

 

Steven E. Groom

   —      —      —     —     —   

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

17,301

 

 

$

 

 

$

370,372

 

 

(1)

(1)

Of the amounts shown in this column, the following amounts are included in the “Salary” column of the Summary Compensation Table for 2015:2018: Mr. Hininger - $35,312 ; Mr. Garfinkle - $19,367; Mr. Lappin - $21,126;$37,054; and Mr. Grande - $21,126;$23,151; the remaining amounts are included in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table for 2014.2017.

(2)

(2)

Of the amounts shown in this column, the following amounts are also reported in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table for 2015:2018: Mr. Hininger - $72,028;$102,091; Mr. Garfinkle - $20,471; Mr. Lappin - $25,876;$17,553; and Mr. Grande - $27,016$42,676.

(3)

(3)

Of the amounts shown in this column, the following amounts are reported in the “Change in Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” column of the Summary Compensation Table for 2015:2018: Mr. Hininger - $25,148;$30,115; Mr. Garfinkle- $5,697; Mr. Lappin - $4,347; and$7,069; Mr. Grande - $14,793.$16,778; and Ms. Mayberry - $6,367.

(4)

(4)

Of the amounts shown in this column, the following amounts were reported as compensation to the Named Executive OfficerNEOs in the Company’s Summary Compensation Table for 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013:2016: Mr. Hininger ($132,488- $169,260 for 2015, $132,8852018, $172,696 for 20142017 and $101,211$120,411 for 2013);2016; Mr. Garfinkle ($45,535- $24,622 for 2015,2018, $37,756 for 2017 and $39,839$28,712 for 2014); Mr. Lappin ($51,349 for 2015, $34,850 for 2014 and $3,449 for 2013);2016; Mr. Grande ($62,935- $82,605 for 2015, $60,4832018, $82,899 for 20142017 and $45,754$57,694 for 2013)2016; and Ms. Mayberry - $6,367 for 2018 and $7,667 for 2017.

Since 2002, we have maintained a non-qualified deferred compensation plan for certain senior executives, including the named executive officers (the “Executive Deferred Compensation Plan”). The Executive Deferred Compensation Plan is an unfunded, non-qualified deferred compensation plan maintained by the Company for certain of its senior executives and other key employees, including the purpose of providing participating executives withNEOs. Eligible employees who participate in the opportunity toExecutive Deferred Compensation Plan may defer a portion of their compensation.compensation by electing to contribute such compensation to the plan.

Pursuant to the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, participating executives may elect to contribute on a pre-tax basis up to 50% of their base salary and up to 100% of their annual cash bonus. The Company matches 100% of contributions up to 5% of total cash compensation. The matching contribution is credited on a monthly basis, but is reduced at the end of the plan year for any matching amounts contributed to the participant’s 401(k) account. The Company also contributes a fixed rate of return on balances in the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, determined at the beginning of each plan year. Participants are 100% vested in amounts deferred under the plan and earnings on those amounts, while the matching contributions vest 20% after two years of service, 40% after three years of service, 80% after four years of service and 100% after five years of service, which is the same vesting for discretionary matching contributions under the 401(k) Plan.service. Each Participant,participant, however, shall become 100% vested in the matching contribution amounts upon termination of employment by reason of death, Disabilitydisability or Retirementretirement or upon the occurrence of a Changechange in Control;control; provided, however, that the Participant shall not become vested upon the occurrence of a Changechange in Controlcontrol to the extent such vesting would cause any portion of his Deferred Compensation Benefitsor her deferred compensation benefits to constitute an “excess parachute payment” under Internal Revenue Code Section 280G.280G of the Code.

Distributions to senior executives are generally payable no earlier than five years subsequent to the date an executive becomes a participant in the Plan, or upon termination of employment, at the election of the participant, but not later than the 15th15th day of the month following the month the individual attains age 65.

During 2015,2018, the Company provided a fixed return of 5.6%5.00% to participants in the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, which rate was based on the return received by the Company on the life insurance policies the Company has purchased on the lives of certain participating executives, including each of the named executive officers.Named Executive Officers. The life insurance policies are intended to partially fund distributions from the Executive Deferred


Compensation PlanPlans, and the Company is the sole beneficiary of such policies. The Company has established an irrevocable Rabbi Trust to secure the plan’s obligations. However, assets in the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan are subject to creditor claims in the event of bankruptcy.

Potential Payments Uponupon Termination or Change in Control

The following benefits are providedEach of our NEOs is eligible to receive certain payments upon termination of employment under the employment agreements with each of our Named Executive Officers dated December 30, 2015. Our employment agreements were renewed in December 2014 on substantially similar terms as under the then existing agreements that were set to expire on December 31, 2014. The updated agreements were revised to reflect the updated base salaries of the executives.circumstances described below:

Retirement. In the event of a termination of employment due to retirement (generally after attaining age 62), our equity award agreements provide that that:

vested options would be exercisable for the remaining stated term of the option (as opposed to a voluntary or for cause“cause” termination, in which case the Named Executive Officer willNEO would generally only have three months following termination to exercise their vested options); and

if the retirement is effective after December 31 of any fiscal year but prior to the applicable performance-based RSU vesting date with respect to such year (which typically occurs in February of the immediately following fiscal year), the applicable portion of unvested performance-based RSUs, if any, that would vest on such vesting date but for the NEO’s termination of employment would vest and be issued to the NEO despite the fact that the NEO is no longer an employee of the Company on such vesting date.

Furthermore, in the event of an NEO’s retirement, matching contributions under the Executive Deferred Contribution Plan would become 100% vested. Mr. Groom is the only named executive officer who is retirement eligible. In August 2015, Mr. Groom announced his intention to retire from his position as Executive Vice President and General Counsel in 2016.

Death or Disability. In the event of death or disability, benefits under our disability plan and payments under our life insurance plan, as applicable, would be payable, which, in the event of death, would equal twice the executive’s compensation subject to certain caps. In addition, matching contributions under the Executive Deferred Contribution Plan would become 100% vested.

In accordance with the terms of our equity award agreements, in the event of the death or disability of a named executive officerNamed Executive Officer (1) all RSUs, including performance-based RSUs will become immediately and fully vested and non-forfeitable and (2) all unvested options that have not earlier terminated or expired in accordance with their terms will automatically vest in full and will be exercisable until the expiration of their stated term.

Termination Without Cause or for Good Reason. In accordance with the effective employment agreements with our current executive officers, if we terminate the employment of the executive without “cause”“cause,” or if the executive terminates the employment for “good reason”reason,” we generally are required to pay a cash severance amount equal to the executive’s annual base salary then in effect, payable in instalments in accordance with the terms of the agreements.

Change in Control. In accordance with the terms of our equity award agreements, in the event of a change of control (1) all RSUs, including performance-based RSUs will become immediately and fully vested and non-forfeitable and (2) all unvested options that have not earlier terminated or expired in accordance with their terms will automatically vest in full and will be exercisable until the expiration of their stated term.

Our Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Share Incentive Plan (pursuant to which certain options remain outstanding, but no further options are being granted) provides that upon a “change in control” or “potential change in control,” as defined in the plan, the value of all outstanding share options granted under the plan, to the extent vested, will be cashed out on the basis of a “change in
control price,” which is generally based on the highest price paid per share of common stock on the NYSE at any time during a 60-day period prior to the occurrence of the “change in control” event.

Our Executive Deferred Compensation Plan provides that upon a change in control, the matching contributions would become 100% vested, unless such vesting would cause any portion of his Deferred Compensation Benefitsthe deferred compensation benefits to constitute an “excess parachute payment” under Internal Revenue Code Section 280G.280G of the Code.

Qualifying Termination Within 180 days of a Change in Control. Pursuant to each of our effectivethe employment agreements with our current executive officers, in the event of a termination by the Company (other than for “cause”) or subject(subject to certain procedural requirements,requirements) termination by the executive for “good reason”reason,” within one-hundred eighty (180) days following a change in control, the executive willeach NEO would be entitled to receive a lump sum cash payment equal to 2.99 times his or her base salary then in effect, and the executive willNEO would continue to be covered under existing life, medical, disability and health insurance plans for a period of one year. All severance payments are made up front promptly after the time of termination in a lump sum payment in order to make a clean separation from, and avoid continued entanglement with, the executive.NEO.


Definitions. Our effective employment agreements with our namedcurrent executive officers and our equity plans generally provide for the following definitions:

The definition of “Good Reason” means when the executive terminates employment with the Company due to (i) a material reduction in the duties, powers or authority of the executive as an officer or employee of the Company.Company or (ii) relocation of the Company’s headquarters to a location more than 30 miles outside of the Nashville, Tennessee metropolitan area, in either case without the executive’s consent. A termination under these circumstances shall be due to Good Reason only if (A) the executive notifies the Company of the existence of the condition that otherwise constitutes Good Reason within thirty (30) days of the initial existence of the condition, (B) the Company fails to remedy the condition within thirty (30) days following its receipt of executive’s notice of the condition constituting Good Reason (the “Cure Period”) and (C) if the Company fails to remedy the condition constituting Good Reason during the Cure Period, the executive terminates employment with the Company due to the condition within thirty (30) days of the expiration of the Cure Period.

The definition of “Cause” includes, among other things, the death or permanent disability of the executive, conviction of certain felonies or criminal acts, willful or material wrongdoing (including dishonesty or fraud), material breach by the executive of his employment agreement or of his fiduciary duty to the Company or its stockholders, andmaterial violations of the Company’s Code of Conduct or intentional violation of any applicable law or regulation affecting the Company in a material respect, as determined by the board of directors, in each case, if thewhich event, action or breach canmay be cured, is not cured within 20 days.subject to a right of the executive to cure under certain conditions.

The definition of “Change in Control” generally means:

a “change in the ownership of the Company”;

a “change in the effective control of the Company”; or

a “change in the ownership of a substantial portion of the assets of the Company,”Company”,

as such terms are defined in Section 1.409A-3(i)(5) of the Internal Revenue Treasury Regulations.

Table of Potential Payments Uponupon Termination or Change in Control

The table below reflects the amount of compensation payable to each of the named executive officersNEOs in the event of termination of such executive’s employment. The amount of compensation payable to each named executive officerNEO upon a change of control, qualifying termination in connection with a change in control, involuntary termination not for cause, and in the event of disability or death of the executive is shown below. The amounts assume that such event was effective as of December 31, 2015,2018, and thus do not include amounts earned through such time, and are estimates of the awards and amounts that would be paid out to the executivesNEOs upon their termination. The amounts shown do not include: (i) benefits earned during the term of our named executive officers’NEOs’ employment that are available to all salaried employees, such as accrued vacation, and (ii) 20152018 cash incentives whichthat were earned as of December 31, 2015.2018. The actual awards and amounts to be paid out can only be determined at the time of such executive’s separation from the Company. ReferencesReference below to RSUs includesmeans our performance-based RSUs, and includes all dividend equivalent rights.

Name

  Change in Control
Only
   Qualifying
Termination upon
a Change in
Control
   Involuntary
Termination
Without Cause
   Death or
Disability
 

Damon T. Hininger

        

Accelerated Vesting of Options(1)

  $—      $—      —      —    

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs(1)

  $3,253,620    $3,253,620     —     $3,253,620  

Cash Severance (2)

   —     $2,574,390    $861,000     —   

Insurance Benefits (3)

   —     $29,433     —     $1,500,000  

Total:

  $3,253,620    $5,857,443    $861,000    $4,753,620  

David M. Garfinkle

        

Accelerated Vesting of Options(1)

  $21,970    $21,970     —     $21,970  

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs(1)

  $1,348,766    $1,348,766     —     $1,348,766  

Cash Severance (2)

   —      $1,157,130    $387,000     —    

Insurance Benefits(3)

   —      $23,073     —      $1,210,000  

Total:

  $1,370,736    $2,550,939    $387,000    $2,580,736  

Harley G. Lappin

        

Accelerated Vesting of Options(1)

   —       —       —       —    

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs(1)

  $1,566,506    $1,566,506     —      $1,566,506  

Cash Severance (2)

   —      $1,232,146    $412,089     —    

Insurance Benefits(3)

   —      $18,351     —      $1,358,000  

Total:

  $1,566,506    $2,817,003    $412,089    $2,924,506  

Anthony L. Grande

        

Accelerated Vesting of Options(1)

   —       —       —       —    

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs(1)

  $1,566,502    $1,566,502     —      $1,566,502  

Cash Severance(2)

   —      $1,232,146    $412,089     —    

Insurance Benefits (3)

   —      $24,732     —      $1,415,000  

Total:

  $1,566,502    $2,823,380    $412,089    $2,981,502  

Steven E. Groom

        

Accelerated Vesting of Options(1)

   —       —       —       —    

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs(1)

  $1,290,092    $1,290,092     —      $1,290,092  

Cash Severance(2)

   —      $979,052    $327,442     —    

Insurance Benefits(3)

   —      $21,767     —      $1,126,000  

Total:

  $1,290,092    $2,290,911    $327,442    $2,416,092  


 

Name

 

Change in

Control

Only

 

 

Qualifying

Termination

upon Change

in Control

 

 

Involuntary

Termination

Without Cause

 

 

Death or

Disability

 

Damon T. Hininger

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs (1)

 

$

1,939,614

 

 

$

1,939,614

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,939,614

 

Cash Severance (2)

 

$

 

 

$

2,810,717

 

 

$

940,039

 

 

$

 

Insurance Benefits (3)

 

$

 

 

$

30,404

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,500,000

 

Total:

 

$

1,939,614

 

 

$

4,780,735

 

 

$

940,039

 

 

$

3,439,614

 

David M. Garfinkle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs (1)

 

$

1,381,142

 

 

$

1,381,142

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,381,142

 

Cash Severance (2)

 

$

 

 

$

1,438,543

 

 

$

481,118

 

 

$

 

Insurance Benefits (3)

 

$

 

 

$

30,694

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,475,000

 

Total:

 

$

1,381,142

 

 

$

2,850,379

 

 

$

481,118

 

 

$

2,856,142

 

Patrick D. Swindle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs (1)

 

$

1,199,243

 

 

$

1,199,243

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,199,243

 

Cash Severance (2)

 

$

 

 

$

1,280,536

 

 

$

428,273

 

 

$

 

Insurance Benefits (3)

 

$

 

 

$

26,485

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,364,000

 

Total:

 

$

1,199,243

 

 

$

2,506,264

 

 

$

428,273

 

 

$

2,563,243

 

Anthony L. Grande

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs (1)

 

$

1,381,142

 

 

$

1,381,142

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,381,142

 

Cash Severance (2)

 

$

 

 

$

1,462,801

 

 

$

489,231

 

 

$

 

Insurance Benefits (3)

 

$

 

 

$

28,812

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,500,000

 

Total:

 

$

1,381,142

 

 

$

2,872,755

 

 

$

489,231

 

 

$

2,881,142

 

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accelerated Vesting of RSUs (1)

 

$

1,302,209

 

 

$

1,302,209

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,302,209

 

Cash Severance (2)

 

$

 

 

$

1,280,536

 

 

$

428,273

 

 

$

 

Insurance Benefits (3)

 

$

 

 

$

27,394

 

 

$

 

 

$

1,364,000

 

Total:

 

$

1,302,209

 

 

$

2,610,139

 

 

$

428,273

 

 

$

2,666,209

 

(1)

(1)

Represents the value of accelerated vesting of stock options, RSUs and Performance-basedperformance-based RSUs, which occurs upon a change in control (whether or not the executive’s employment is terminated) and upon the death or disability of the executive. Accelerated vesting of stock option amounts are calculated as the difference between the closing market price of our common stock on December 31, 2015 ($26.49 per share as reported on the NYSE) and the respective exercise prices of in-the-money unvested stock options. Accelerated vesting ofperformance-based RSUs and Performance-based RSUs areis calculated using the NYSE closing market price on December 31, 2015,2018 ($17.83 per share), and such amounts includeincludes the outstanding dividend equivalents associated with such RSUs which willthat similarly vest on an accelerated basis.

(2)

(2)

In the event of an involuntary termination absent a change in control and without cause, represents an amount equal to one times100% of current base salary which for the first three months would be paid out on the same terms and with the same frequency as the executive’s base salary was paid prior to December 31, 2015, and the remainder of the severance amount would be paid out in a lump sum.2018. In the event of a qualifying termination upon a change in control, represents an amount equal to 2.99 times current base salary, to be paid out in a lump sum within 40 days of the termination date.

(3)

(3)

In the event of a qualifying termination upon a change in control, represents the premiums expected to be paid based upon the types of insurance coverage the Company carried for such executive as of December 31, 20152018, and the premiums in effect on such date. In the event of death, represents the payouts under the life insurance policies, equal to two times total cash compensation, subject to certain caps. The benefits payable under the supplemental long termlong-term disability policypolicies in the event of a disability are not shown in the table. In general, executive officers are entitled to higher payment formulas and higher caps for a potentially longer period of time than other employees under the supplemental long term disability policy.policies.

2018 CEO Pay Ratio

As required by Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act, we are disclosing the ratio of CEO pay to the median employee pay of all our employees (other than the CEO) in 2018, calculated in accordance with Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K.

The ratio of the annual total compensation of our CEO to the median total compensation of all employees (other than our CEO) for 2018 was 112 to one. This ratio was based on the following:

the annual total compensation of our CEO, determined as described in the Summary Compensation Table included in this Proxy Statement, was $4,117,669; and

the median of the total compensation of all employees (other than our CEO), determined in accordance with SEC rules, was $36,757.


As permitted by the SEC rules, we used the same median employee as in 2017, as there were no significant changes to our median employee’s status, our employee population or our compensation programs in 2018 that would significantly impact the calculation of the pay ratio above.  The methodology and the material assumptions and estimates we used to determine the median employee in 2017 were as follows:

Total Employee Population: We determined that, as of November 30, 2017, the date we selected to identify the median employee, our employee population consisted of approximately 12,600 individuals.

Compensation Measure Used to Identify the Median Employee: For purposes of measuring the total compensation of our employees to identify the median employee, we used base salary, including overtime pay, for the period beginning December 1, 2016 and ending November 30, 2017. Compensation for employees hired during the period was annualized as permitted by SEC rules.

Total Compensation of Median Employee: In order to determine the total compensation of the median employee, we identified and calculated that employee’s base salary, including overtime pay, for the period beginning December 1, 2017 and ending November 30, 2018 in accordance with the requirements of Item 402(c)(2)(x) of Regulation S-K, resulting in total compensation of $36,757.

Annual Total Compensation of CEO: With respect to the annual total compensation of our CEO, in accordance with SEC rules, we used the amount reported for Mr. Hininger in the “Total” column for 2018 in the Summary Compensation Table included in this Proxy Statement.

Our reported pay ratio information is a reasonable estimate calculated in a manner consistent with Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K. The SEC rules for identifying the median employee and calculating pay ratio allow companies to use different methodologies, exemptions, estimates and assumptions. As a result, our pay ratio may not be comparable to the pay ratio reported by other companies.

Director Compensation

Non-employee directors (i.e., all directors other than Mr.Messrs. Hininger and Mr. Ferguson)Lappin) are compensated pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors’ Compensation Plan and the 2008 Stock Plan, which for 20152018 provided for the following:

Annual equity grants;

Annual Board, committee and committee chair retainers; and

Board and committee unscheduled meeting fees.

Non-employee directors may elect to receive all or a portion of their retainers in the form of common stock rather than cash. Non-employeeNon-executive directors may also defer all or a portion of their retainer and meeting fees pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan. In addition, non-employee directors are reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred to attend Board and committee meetings, as well as director education programs.

The retainers and meeting fees paid to our non-employee directors for 20152018 are as follows:

 

Retainers and Fees

  2015 

Board retainer

  $53,500  

Board meeting fee

  $3,250  

Audit and Risk chair retainer

  $20,000  

Audit and Risk member retainer

  $2,200  

Compensation and Nominating & Governance chair retainer

  $5,350  

Committee chair meeting fee (excluding Executive)

  $2,700  

Non-chair committee meeting fee

  $2,200  

Retainers and Fees

 

2018

 

Independent Board Chairman retainer

 

$

100,000

 

Non-Chair Board retainer

 

$

80,000

 

Audit Committee chair retainer

 

$

20,000

 

Audit Committee member retainer

 

$

8,000

 

Other committee chair retainer

 

$

10,000

 

Other committee member retainer

 

$

4,000

 

Special Litigation Committee chair retainer

 

$

28,000

 

Special Litigation Committee member retainer

 

$

20,000

 

Board and committee unscheduled meeting fee

 

$

1,000

 


In addition to cash compensation, non-employee directors are granted RSUs with a grant date fair market value of approximately $105,000$120,000 per year, generally on the same date as grants of equity awards are made to our executive officers and other employees. TheseSubject to certain exceptions contained in the award agreement, these RSUs vest on the one-year anniversary of the grant date, subject to continued service through such date.

Compensation Changes Effective January 1, 2016. In August 2015, PwC prepared a report for the Compensation Committee analysing and providing market data regarding board compensation packages and trends for non-employee board compensation among our peer group companies. PwC found that our non-employee director total compensation was at the median of our peer group, but was difficult to administer and the per meeting fees was not common among our peers. After detailed review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors and the Board approved a revised non-employee director compensation package that was effective as of January 1, 2016. The revisions for 2016 include

elimination of board and committee meeting fees (other than $1,000 per unscheduled meeting);

increase annual board retainer from $53,500 to $80,000;

maintain audit chair retainer at $20,000, and increase other committee chair retainers from $5,350 to $10,000;

increase committee membership retainer from $2,200 to $8,000 for audit committee member and $4,000 for all other committee members; and

increased the annual equity grant to $120,000 from $105,000.

Mr. Ferguson’s Compensation. John D. Ferguson is currently employed by the Company as our executive Chairman of the Board; however, Mr. Ferguson will be retiring from his position as of the Annual Meeting. Mr. Ferguson formerly served as our Chief Executive Officer from 2000 to 2009. Mr. Ferguson is paid cash compensation for his services as our employee, based largely on reductions to the cash compensation paid to him in 2009 (as approved by the Compensation Committee from time to time). Mr. Ferguson does not currently receive any equity award compensation for his services, nor does Ferguson receive any non-executive director compensation for his services as a director. In connection with his retirement, pursuant to Mr. Ferguson’s employment agreement (as amended by the letter agreement between Mr. Ferguson and the Company, dated August 14, 2009), Mr. Ferguson will become entitled to receive severance benefits and payments consisting of (i) two times his base salary (or a total of $1,121,536), payable over a two-year period, plus (ii) a one time lump sum cash payment of approximately $19,000 for Mr. Ferguson’s use toward securing continued insurance, including medical, health, and disability insurance for two years following his retirement.

20152018 Director Compensation Table

The following table summarizes the compensation paid with respect to the fiscal year ended December 31, 20152018 to each of the Company’s directors except Damon T.Mr. Hininger our Chief Executive Officer, whose compensation is reflected in the Summary Compensation Table.Table:

Name

  Fees
Earned or
Paid in
Cash
   Stock
Awards

(2) (5)
   Change in
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings(3)
   All Other
Compensation
 Total 

 

Fees

Earned or

Paid in

Cash

 

 

Stock

Awards(3) (5)

 

 

Change in

Nonqualified

Deferred

Compensation

Earnings (4)

 

 

All Other

Compensation

 

 

Total

 

Donna M. Alvarado

  $96,150    $104,986     —      —    $201,136  

 

$

107,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

227,008

 

John D. Correnti(1)

  $52,424    $104,986     —      —    $157,410  

Robert J. Dennis

  $80,750    $104,986    —       —     $185,736  

 

$

89,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

209,008

 

Mark A. Emkes

  $89,550    $104,986     —      —    $194,536  

 

$

144,000

 

 

$

170,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

314,008

 

John D. Ferguson

   —      —     $85,537    $902,182 (4)  $987,719  

C. Michael Jacobi

  $102,950    $104,986    $310     —    $208,246  

Stacia A. Hylton

 

$

115,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

235,008

 

Harley G. Lappin(1)

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

Anne L. Mariucci

  $87,350    $104,986     763     —    $193,099  

 

$

94,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

4,152

 

 

$

 

 

$

218,160

 

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

  $83,950    $104,986     —      —    $188,936  

 

$

117,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

237,008

 

Devin I. Murphy (2)

 

$

13,391

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

13,391

 

Charles L. Overby

  $103,500    $104,986     —      —    $208,486  

 

$

117,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

237,008

 

John R. Prann, Jr.

  $93,950    $104,986    $366     —    $199,302  

 

$

109,000

 

 

$

120,008

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

229,008

 

Joseph V. Russell

  $94,150    $104,986    $28,106     —    $227,242  

 

(1)

(1)

Mr. Correnti passed awayLappin is employed as a special operations advisor to the leadership team of the Company and is compensated for the services provided in August 2015.such capacity. Mr. Lappin is not compensated for his services as a director of the Company. In 2018, Mr. Lappin was paid a salary of $175,000 for his services as a special operations advisor to the leadership team of the Company. He also earned $1,895 of above-market earnings on amounts he chose to defer pursuant to the Companyʼs Deferred Compensation Plan. This amount is based on the excess of the Companyʼs fixed rate for 2018 of 5.00% over 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate, with compounding (as prescribed under section 1274(d) of the Code) of 3.16%. Mr. Lappin is also eligible to participate in various benefit programs generally made available to employees of the Company.

(2)

(2)

Mr. Murphyʼs Board service began in November 2018.

(3)

The amounts shown in this column represent the aggregate grant-date fair value of RSUs based on the closing stock price of $40.24$21.67 on February 19, 2015,22, 2018, the date of annual grant of 2,6095,538 RSUs. Mr. Emkesʼ stock awards include an award of $50,000 or 2,405 RSUs, which he elected to receive on May 10, 2018 as compensation for 50% of his annual independent Board Chairman retainer.  The director RSUs vest on the anniversary date of the grant and have dividend equivalent rights that are payable in cash only when and to the extent the RSUs vest and the underlying shares are issued. All grants of RSUs and dividend equivalents were made under the Company’s 2008 Plan.

(3)

(4)

The amounts shown in this column represent above-market earnings on fees that the Director chosedirector elected to defer pursuant to the Non-Employee Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan, which is more fully described below.in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan in 2018 section of this Proxy Statement. Amounts shown are based on the excess of the Company’s fixed rate for 20152018 of 5.6%5.00%, andover 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate, with compounding (as prescribed under section 1274(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, (26 U.S.C. 1274(d)))Code) of 3.29%3.16%.

(4)

The amount reflects total employee compensation Mr. Ferguson earned for his services as executive chairman of the board during 2015, which consists of: salary of $560,768; cash incentive plan of $285,992; and Company matching contributions to the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan of $55,422.

(5)

As of December 31, 2015,2018, the aggregate number of unvested stock awards and option awards outstanding for each of the Company’s non-employee directors other than Mr. Correnti, who passed away in August 2015, were as follows:

Name

 

Aggregate

RSU Awards

Outstanding as

of December

31, 2018

 

 

Aggregate

Option Awards

Outstanding as

of December

31, 2018

 

Donna M. Alvarado

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

43,712

 

Robert J. Dennis

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

 

Mark A. Emkes

 

 

7,943

 

 

 

 

Stacia A. Hylton

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

 

Anne L. Mariucci

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

10,952

 

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

43,712

 

Devin I. Murphy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charles L. Overby

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

 

John R. Prann, Jr.

 

 

5,538

 

 

 

13,610

 


Name

  Aggregate Stock Awards
Outstanding as of
December 31, 2015
   Aggregate Option Awards
Outstanding as of
December 31, 2015
 

Donna M. Alvarado

   2,609     87,742  

Robert J. Dennis

   2,609     —   

Mark A. Emkes

   2,609     —   

John D. Ferguson

   —       —   

C. Michael Jacobi

   2,609     43,535  

Anne L. Mariucci

   2,609     10,952  

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

   2,609     87,742  

Charles L. Overby

   2,609     59,532  

John R. Prann, Jr.

   2,609     43,535  

Joseph V. Russell

   2,609     57,817  


Director Stock OwnershipOwnership Guidelines

We maintain stock ownership guidelines applicable to our executive officers and non-executive directors. The Company’s original stock ownership guidelines were adopted by our Board of Directors on March 1, 2007. The stock ownership guidelines are designed to align the economic interests of executive officers and directorsthe Board with those of stockholders and to discourage excessive risk-taking by management and directors. The guidelines as applied to our directors provide that the Company’s non-executive directors are expected to own a fixed number of shares of common stock of the Company equal to four times such director’s annual retainer (excluding any retainer for chairing or serving as a member of a committee) in effect as of the later of March 1, 2012 or their laterthe date of their initial election or appointment to the Board, divided by the Company’s closing common stock price, as reported on the NYSE, on such date. The stock ownership guidelines were amended by our Board of Directors in May 2013 to increase the number of shares theour executive officers and non-executive directors and officers are expected to own to give effect to the REIT conversion special dividend. Non-executive directors are requiredexpected to achieve these ownership levels, subject to a limited hardship exemption, five years following their initial election or appointment to the Board, or (in the case of directors serving on the Board at the time the guidelines were adopted) by March 1, 2012. See “Stock“Executive Officer Stock Ownership Guidelines” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this proxyProxy Statement for a description of the shares counted in determining share ownership.

Our guidelines and the compliance status of the Company’s current non-executive directors as of the last quarterly review date of February 2, 201620, 2019 are shown in the table below.

 

Name

  Shares Required by
Guidelines
   Number of Shares
Held (1)
   Compliance Date 

 

Shares

Required by

Guidelines

 

 

Number of

Shares Held

 

 

Compliance

Date

Donna M. Alvarado

   9,105     31,153     3/1/2012  

 

 

9,105

 

 

 

53,133

 

 

3/1/2012

Robert J. Dennis

   7,112     11,096     2/21/2018  

 

 

7,112

 

 

 

21,534

 

 

2/21/2018

Mark A. Emkes

   6,050     2,484     8/14/2019  

 

 

6,050

 

 

 

50,950

 

 

8/14/2019

John D. Ferguson (2)

   95,597     181,410     3/1/2012  

C. Michael Jacobi

   9,105     74,519     3/1/2012  

Stacia A. Hylton

 

 

12,353

 

 

 

5,877

 

 

8/11/2021

Harley G. Lappin

 

 

14,222

 

 

 

47,846

 

 

1/1/2023

Anne L. Mariucci

   11,909     20,747     12/8/2016  

 

 

11,909

 

 

 

37,142

 

 

12/8/2016

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

   9,105     16,195     3/1/2012  

 

 

9,105

 

 

 

25,683

 

 

3/1/2012

Devin I. Murphy

 

 

14,685

 

 

 

 

 

11/6/2018

Charles L. Overby

   9,105     23,671     3/1/2012  

 

 

9,105

 

 

 

35,709

 

 

3/1/2012

John R. Prann, Jr.

   9,105     27,066     3/1/2012  

 

 

9,105

 

 

 

38,504

 

 

3/1/2012

Joseph V. Russell

   9,105     271,697     3/1/2012  

 

(1)Does not include 2,609 shares from the RSUs granted to the non-employee directors in 2015, which vested on February 19, 2016.
(2)Calculated using executive officer formula due to Mr. Ferguson’s status as a salaried employee.


SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIALBENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT

Ownership of Common Stock – Directors and Executive Officers

The following table contains information regarding the beneficial ownership of our common stock as of March 14, 201618, 2019 by (i) each current director and nominee, (ii) our named executive officers, and (iii) all of our current directors and executive officers as a group.

 

Name of Beneficial Owner

  Number of
Shares
Beneficially
Owned(1)
   Shares
Acquirable
Within 60
Days(2)
   Total
Beneficial
Ownership
   Percent of
Common Stock
Beneficially
Owned(3)
 

John D. Ferguson(4)

   181,410     —      181,410     *  

Damon T. Hininger

   197,461     474,367     671,828     *  

Name of Beneficial Owner (1)

 

Number of

Shares

Beneficially

Owned (2)

 

 

Shares

Acquirable

Within 60

Days (3)

 

 

Total

Beneficial

Ownership

 

 

Percent of

Common

Stock

Beneficially

Owned (4)

 

Donna M. Alvarado

   33,762     87,742     121,504     *  

 

 

58,671

 

 

 

43,712

 

 

 

102,383

 

 

*

 

Robert J. Dennis

   13,705     —      13,705     *  

 

 

27,072

 

 

 

 

 

 

27,072

 

 

*

 

Mark A. Emkes

   5,093     —      5,093     *  

 

 

56,488

 

 

 

2,405

 

 

 

58,893

 

 

*

 

David M. Garfinkle

   63,727     110,303     174,030     *  

C. Michael Jacobi

   77,128     43,535     120,663     *  

Damon T. Hininger

 

 

224,758

 

 

 

373,495

 

 

 

598,253

 

 

*

 

Stacia A. Hylton

 

 

11,415

 

 

 

 

 

 

11,415

 

 

*

 

Harley G. Lappin

 

 

55,587

 

 

 

 

 

 

55,587

 

 

*

 

Anne L. Mariucci

 

 

42,680

 

 

 

10,952

 

 

 

53,632

 

 

*

 

Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

   26,020     73,637     99,657     *  

 

 

37,409

 

 

 

27,892

 

 

 

65,301

 

 

*

 

Anne L. Mariucci

   23,356     10,952     34,308     *  

Devin I. Murphy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

 

Charles L. Overby

   26,280     59,532     85,812     *  

 

 

41,247

 

 

 

 

 

 

41,247

 

 

*

 

John R. Prann, Jr.

   29,675     43,535     73,210     *  

 

 

44,042

 

 

 

13,610

 

 

 

57,652

 

 

*

 

Joseph V. Russell (5)

   274,306     57,817     332,123     *  

David M. Garfinkle

 

 

121,293

 

 

 

37,489

 

 

 

158,782

 

 

*

 

Anthony L. Grande

   41,689     —       41,689     *  

 

 

75,452

 

 

 

 

 

 

75,452

 

 

*

 

Steven E. Groom

   78,023     4,907     82,930     *  

Harley G. Lappin

   69,260     —       69,260     *  

Lucibeth N. Mayberry

 

 

77,866

 

 

 

21,175

 

 

 

99,041

 

 

*

 

Patrick D. Swindle

 

 

24,216

 

 

 

 

 

 

24,216

 

 

*

 

All current directors and executive officers as
a group (17 persons)

   1,195,427     993,738     2,189,165     1.8

 

 

945,170

 

 

 

530,730

 

 

 

1,475,900

 

 

 

1.24

%

 

*

*

Represents beneficial ownership of less than 1% of the outstanding shares of our common stock.

(1)

Except as set forth below,

(1)

The address for each listed person is our corporate headquarters.

(2)

Each person in the table has sole voting and investment power over the shares listed.

(2)

(3)

Reflects the number of shares that could be purchased upon exercise of stock options that are exercisable with 60 days of March 14, 2016. None of our outstanding RSUs will vest within 60 days of March 14, 2016.18, 2019. In addition, Mr. Emkes vests in 2,405 RSUs on May 10, 2019 (53 days from record date).

(3)

(4)

The percentages in this column are based on 117,460,831119,067,887 shares outstanding as of March 14, 2016.18, 2019. In addition, pursuant to SEC rules, shares of the Company’s common stock that an individual owner has a right to acquire within 60 days pursuant to the exercise of stock options are deemed to be outstanding for the purpose of computing the ownership of that owner and for the purpose of computing the ownership of all directors and executive officers as a group, but are not deemed outstanding for the purpose of computing the ownership of any other owner.

(4)Includes (i) 4,167 shares held in our 401(k) Plan; (ii) 80,573 shares held by Calco Investments, LLC; (iii) 80,573 held by Ferguson Financial, LLC; and (iv) 1,182 shares held by the Ferguson Family Trust. Mr. Ferguson shares investment and voting control with his wife on the shares held in the Ferguson Family Trust.
(5)Includes 25,500 shares held indirectly through two trusts established for the benefit of Mr. Russell’s grandchildren, and as to which Mr. Russell has voting and dispositive control as trustee.

Ownership of Common Stock – Principal Stockholders

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to the beneficial ownership of our voting securities as of March 14, 201618, 2019 by each person who is known by CCAthe Company to own beneficially more than 5% of any class of our outstanding voting securities of CCA:the Company:

 

Name of Beneficial Owner

  Number of
Shares
Beneficially Owned
   Percent of
Common Stock
Beneficially Owned (1)
 

The Vanguard Group, Inc.(2)
100 Vanguard Blvd.
Malvern, PA 19355

   16,868,942     14.4

Vanguard Specialized Funds
Vanguard REIT Index Fund(3)
100 Vanguard Blvd. Malvern, PA 19355

   8,436,925     7.2

BlackRock, Inc.(4)
55 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10055

   8,837,191     7.5

Epoch Investment Partners, Inc.(5)
399 Park Avenue
New York, New York, 10022

   7,283,290     6.2

Managed Account Advisors LLC(6)
101 Hudson Street, 9th Floor
Jersey City, New Jersey 07302

   7,078,039     6.0

Lazard Asset Management LLC(7)
30 Rockefeller Plaza New York,
New York 10112

   6,812,164     5.8

The London Company(8)
1800 Bayberry Court, Suite 301
Richmond, Virginia 23226

   6,203,255     5.3

Name and Address of Beneficial Owner

 

Number of

Shares

Beneficially

Owned

 

 

Percent of

Common

Stock

Beneficially

Owned (1)

 

The Vanguard Group, Inc. (2)

   100 Vanguard Blvd.

   Malvern, PA 19355

 

 

17,576,540

 

 

 

14.76

%

BlackRock, Inc.(3)

   55 East 52nd Street

   New York, NY 10055

 

 

14,331,515

 

 

 

12.04

%

FMR LLC (4)

   245 Summer Street

   Boston, MA 02210

 

 

6,662,695

 

 

 

5.60

%

 

(1)

(1)

The percentages in this column are based on 117,460,831119,067,887 shares outstanding as of March 14, 2016.18, 2019.


(2)

(2)

Based on the Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 10, 201611, 2019 by The Vanguard Group, which reported sole voting power over 84,116118,340 shares, shared voting power over 5,70012,964 shares, sole dispositive power over 16,786,060 17,458,046 shares and shared dispositive power over 82,882 118,494 shares. 8,436,925

(3)

Based on the Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on January 24, 2019 by Blackrock, Inc., which reported sole voting power over 14,142,033 shares included in this amount are owned by Vanguard Specialized Funds (see footnote 3 below).and sole dispositive power over 14,331,515 shares.

(3)

(4)

Based on the Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 9, 201613, 2019 by Vanguard Specialized Funds—Vanguard REIT Index Fund, which reported sole voting power over all of the shares and dispositive power over none of the shares.

(4)Based on the Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 10, 2016 by Blackrock, Inc., which reported sole voting power over 8,443,752 shares and sole dispositive power over 8,837,191 shares.
(5)Based on the Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 11, 2016 by TD Asset Management, Inc., which reported sole voting and dispositive power over 271,240 shares, and Epoch Investment Partners, Inc., which reported sole voting and dispositive power over 7,012,050 shares.
(6)Based on the Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 2, 2016 by Managed Account Advisors LLC, which reported sole dispositive power over 7,047,801 shares and shared voting and dispositive power over 30,238 shares.
(7)Based on the Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 5, 2016 by Lazard Asset ManagementFMR LLC, which reported sole voting power over 596,9084,073,818 shares and sole dispositive power over 6,812,1646,622,695 shares.

(8)Based on the Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 9, 2016 by The London Company, which reported sole voting and dispositive power over 5,313,263 shares and shared dispositive power over 889,992 shares.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our executive officers and directors to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the SEC and the NYSE. Based on our records and other information, all Section 16(a) filing requirements were satisfied by our executive officers and directors in 2015,2018, except for the following:

A Form 3 for Mr. Patrick D. Swindle was filed late on February 22, 2018 to report his being appointed Chief Corrections Officer on January 1, 2018.

A Form 4 for Mr. RussellThurgood Marshall was filed late on August 31, 2015June 27, 2018 to report the acquisition an aggregatedisposition of 20,0003,300 shares of Company stock on June 18, 2018.

A Form 3 for Mr. Cole Carter was filed late on July 17, 2018 to report his being appointed Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary.

A Form 3 for Mr. Devin I. Murphy was filed late on December 14, 2018 to report his being appointed to the Board of which 9,500 shares are directly owned and an aggregate of 10,500 shares are indirectly owned through trusts established for the benefit of his grandchildren.Directors on November 6, 2018.



OTHEROTHER

No Incorporation by Reference

To the extent that this proxy statementProxy Statement is incorporated by reference into any other filing by us under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, the sections of this proxy statementProxy Statement entitled “Audit Committee Report”“Report of the Audit Committee” or “Compensation Committee Report”“Report of the Compensation Committee” will not be deemed incorporated, unless specifically provided otherwise in such filing.

In addition, references to our website are not intended to function as a hyperlink and the information contained on our website is not intended to be part of this proxy statement.Proxy Statement. Information on our website, other than our proxy statement,this Proxy Statement, Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and form of proxy, is not part of the proxy soliciting material and is not incorporated herein by reference.

Forward-Looking Statements

This proxy statementProxy Statement contains “forward-looking statements” (as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). These statements are based on our current expectations and beliefs and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual results to differ materially from those set forth in the statements. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements may include statements regarding actions to be taken by us. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, including those mentioned in the risk factors in Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20152018 and in our most recent periodic reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K filed with the SEC, and actual results may vary materially.

 

By Order of the Board of Directors,

LOGO

Steven E. Groom

/s/ Cole G. Carter

Executive

Cole G. Carter

Senior Vice President, General Counsel and& Secretary


APPENDIX: RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP DISCLOSURES

APPENDIX A TO 2019 PROXY STATEMENT

Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Disclosures
($ in thousands, except per share amounts)

 

 

For the Years Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2018

 

 

2017

 

Net Income

 

$

159,207

 

 

$

178,040

 

Special items:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expenses associated with debt refinancing transactions

 

 

1,016

 

 

 

 

Charges associated with adoption of tax reform

 

 

1,024

 

 

 

4,548

 

Expenses associated with mergers and acquisitions

 

 

3,096

 

 

 

2,530

 

Contingent consideration for acquisition of businesses

 

 

6,085

 

 

 

 

Asset impairments

 

 

1,580

 

 

 

614

 

Adjusted net income

 

$

172,008

 

 

$

185,732

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding - basic

 

 

118,544

 

 

 

118,084

 

Effect of dilutive securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stock options

 

 

111

 

 

 

310

 

Restricted stock-based awards

 

 

61

 

 

 

71

 

Weighted average shares and assumed conversions - diluted

 

 

118,716

 

 

 

118,465

 

Diluted Earnings Per Share

 

$

1.34

 

 

$

1.50

 

Adjusted Diluted Earnings Per Share

 

$

1.45

 

 

$

1.57

 

 

 

For the Years Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2018

 

 

2017

 

Net income

 

$

159,207

 

 

$

178,040

 

Depreciation and amortization of real estate assets

 

 

101,771

 

 

 

95,902

 

Impairment of real estate assets

 

 

1,580

 

 

 

355

 

Funds From Operations

 

$

262,558

 

 

$

274,297

 

Expenses associated with debt refinancing transactions

 

 

1,016

 

 

 

 

Charges associated with adoption of tax reform

 

 

1,024

 

 

 

4,548

 

Expenses associated with mergers and acquisitions

 

 

3,096

 

 

 

2,530

 

Contingent consideration for acquisition of businesses

 

 

6,085

 

 

 

 

Goodwill and other impairments

 

 

 

 

 

259

 

Normalized Funds From Operations

 

$

273,779

 

 

$

281,634

 

Funds From Operations Per Diluted Share

 

$

2.21

 

 

$

2.32

 

Normalized Funds From Operations Per Diluted Share

 

$

2.31

 

 

$

2.38

 


APPENDIX TO 2019 PROXY STATEMENT

Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Disclosures

($ in thousands, except per share amounts)

 

 

For the Years Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2018

 

 

2017

 

Net Income

 

$

159,207

 

 

$

178,040

 

Interest expense

 

 

82,129

 

 

 

69,507

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 

156,501

 

 

 

147,129

 

Income tax expense

 

 

8,353

 

 

 

13,911

 

EBITDA

 

$

406,190

 

 

$

408,587

 

Expenses associated with debt refinancing transactions

 

 

1,016

 

 

 

 

Expenses associated with mergers and acquisitions

 

 

3,096

 

 

 

2,530

 

Contingent consideration for acquisition of businesses

 

 

6,085

 

 

 

 

Depreciation expense associated with STFRC lease

 

 

(16,453

)

 

 

(16,453

)

Interest expense associated with STFRC lease

 

 

(5,562

)

 

 

(6,425

)

Asset impairments

 

 

1,580

 

 

 

614

 

Adjusted EBITDA

 

$

395,952

 

 

$

388,853

 

Adjusted Net Income, EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA, Funds From Operations (FFO), Normalized FFO and, where appropriate, their corresponding per share metrics, are non-GAAP financial measures. CoreCivic believes these measures are important operating measures that supplement discussion and analysis of the Company’s results of operations and are used to review and assess operating performance of the Company and its facilities and their management teams. CoreCivic believes it is useful to provide investors, lenders and security analysts disclosures of its results of operations on the same basis that is used by management. FFO, in particular, is a widely accepted non-GAAP supplemental measure of REIT performance, grounded in the standards for FFO established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT). NAREIT defines FFO as net income computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, excluding gains (or losses) from sales of property and extraordinary items, plus depreciation and amortization of real estate and impairment of depreciable real estate. EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA and Normalized FFO are useful as supplemental measures of the performance of the Company’s facilities because such measures do not take into account depreciation and amortization, or with respect to EBITDA, the impact of the Company’s tax provisions and financing strategies. Because the historical cost accounting convention used for real estate assets requires depreciation (except on land), this accounting presentation assumes the value of real estate assets diminishes at a level rate over time. Due to the unique structure, design and use of the Company’s properties, management believes assessing performance of the Company’s properties without the impact of depreciation or amortization is useful. However, prior to the adoption of Accounting Standards Update 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (ASU 2016-02) on January 1, 2019, a portion of the rental payments for the South Texas Family Residential Center (STFRC) was classified as depreciation and interest expense for financial reporting purposes in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 840-40-55, formerly Emerging Issues Task Force No. 97-10, “The Effect of Lessee Involvement in Asset Construction.” Adjusted EBITDA includes such depreciation and interest expense in order to more properly reflect the cash flows associated with this lease. Upon adoption of ASU 2016-02, all rental payments associated with this lease are classified as operating expenses. CoreCivic may make adjustments to FFO from time to time for certain other income and expenses it considers non-recurring, infrequent or unusual, even though such items may require cash settlement, because such items do not reflect a necessary component of the ongoing operations of the Company. Normalized FFO excludes the effects of such items. CoreCivic calculates Adjusted Net Income by adding to GAAP Net Income expenses associated with the Company’s debt refinancing transactions, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) activity, restructuring charges, and certain impairments and other charges that the Company believes are unusual or non-recurring to provide an alternative measure of comparing operating performance for the periods presented. Even though expenses associated with M&A activity may be recurring, the magnitude and timing fluctuate based on the timing and scope of M&A activity, and therefore, such expenses, which are not a necessary component of the ongoing operations of the Company, may not be comparable from period to period. Other companies may calculate Adjusted Net Income, EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA, FFO and Normalized FFO differently than the Company does, or adjust for other items, and therefore comparability may be limited. Adjusted Net Income, EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA, FFO and Normalized FFO and their corresponding per share measures are not measures of performance under GAAP, and should not be considered as an alternative to cash flows from operating activities, a measure of liquidity or an alternative to net income as indicators of the Company’s operating performance or any other measure of performance derived in accordance with GAAP. This data should be read in conjunction with the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related notes included in its filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


LOGO

 

CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICACORECIVIC, INC.

ATTN: CORPORATE SECRETARY

10 BURTON HILLS BLVD.BOULEVARD

NASHVILLE, TNTENNESSEE 37215

VOTE BY INTERNET -www.proxyvote.com

Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time on May 11, 2016,15, 2019, the day before the meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form.

VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903

Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time on May 11, 2016,15, 2019, the day before the meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions.

 

VOTE BY MAIL

Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

 

SHAREHOLDERSTOCKHOLDER MEETING REGISTRATION:

To vote and/or attend the meeting, go to “shareholder meeting registration”the “Register for Meeting” link at www.proxyvote.com.

TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:

 

E37127-P00730

M83050-P61230  

KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR  RECORDS

 

DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION  ONLY

THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED.DATED

CORECIVIC, INC

The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the election of the following nominees:

ForAgainstAbstain

1a.   Donna M. Alvarado CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICAccc

1b.   Robert J. Dennis ccc

1c.   Mark A. Emkes ccc

1d.   Damon T. Hininger ccc

1e.   Stacia A. Hylton ccc

1f.   Harley G. Lappin ccc

ForAgainstAbstain

1g.   Anne L. Mariucciccc

1h.   Thurgood Marshall, Jr. ccc

1i.    Devin I. Murphyccc

1j.    Charles L. Overbyccc

1k.    John R. Prann, Jr.ccc

 

The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the election of the following nominees:

proposals 2 and 3.

 

1.

Election of Directors

.

Nominees:ForAgainstAbstain

For

Against

Abstain

1a.  Donna M. Alvarado

¨¨¨

1b.  Robert J. Dennis

¨¨¨ForAgainstAbstain

1c.  Mark A. Emkes

¨¨¨

1d.  Damon T. Hininger

¨¨¨

The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the following proposals:

1e.  C. Michael Jacobi

¨¨¨

2.

2.Non-Binding Ratification of the appointment by our Audit Committee of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

ccc

 

¨

¨

¨

1f.  Anne L. Mariucci

¨¨¨

1g.  Thurgood Marshall, Jr.

¨¨¨

3.

Advisory3.Advisory vote to approve the compensation of our Named Executive Officers.

ccc

 

¨

 

¨

 

¨

1h.  Charles L. Overby

¨¨¨

1i.  John R. Prann, Jr.

¨

¨

¨

For address changes and/or comments, please check this box and write them on the back where indicated.

c

 

NOTE:¨

NOTE: In their discretion, the proxies are authorized to vote upon such other business as may properly come before the meeting and any adjournments or any adjournmentpostponements thereof.

 

Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by authorized officer.

Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX]

Date

 

Signature (Joint Owners)

Date

   


 

If you plan to attend the meeting on May 12, 2016,16, 2019, you must request an admission ticket in advance by following the instructions set forth in the Proxy Statement. Tickets will be issued only to registered and beneficial owners as of March 14, 2016.18, 2019.

Requests for admission tickets will be processed in the order in which they are received and must be requested no later than 11:59 p.m. local time on Thursday, May 11, 2016.9, 2019. On the day of the meeting, each shareholderstockholder will be requestedrequired to present a valid picture identification such as a driver’s license or passport with theirhis or her admission ticket.

See page 2 of the Proxy Statement for additional details.


Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting:

The Notice and Proxy Statement, Annual Letter to Stockholders and Annual Report on Form 10-K are available at www.proxyvote.com.

SHAREHOLDERSTOCKHOLDER MEETING REGISTRATION:To vote and/or attend the meeting, go to “shareholder meeting registration”the “Register for Meeting” link at www.proxyvote.com.

 

M83051-P61230 E37128-P00730

 

PROXY

CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

To Be Held May 12, 2016

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned hereby appoint(s) Damon T. Hininger and David Garfinkle, and each of them with full power of substitution and revocation, as proxies of the undersigned, and hereby authorize(s) them to represent and to vote, as designated, all of the voting common stock of Corrections Corporation of America, a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), held by the undersigned at the close of business on Monday, March 14, 2016, at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company to be held on Thursday, May 12, 2016, at 10:00 a.m., CDT, at the Company’s corporate headquarters, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, and at any adjournments or postponements thereof.

This proxy, when properly executed, will be voted in the manner directed herein. If no such direction is made, this proxy will be voted in accordance with the Board of Directors’ recommendations.

PLEASE SIGN, DATE AND RETURN PROMPTLY IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.

PROXY

Address Changes/Comments:CORECIVIC, INC.

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

To Be Held May 16, 2019

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned hereby appoint(s) Damon T. Hininger and David M. Garfinkle, and each of them with full power of substitution and revocation, as proxies of the undersigned, and hereby authorize(s) them to represent and to vote, as designated, all of the voting common stock of CoreCivic, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), held by the undersigned at the close of business on Monday, March 18, 2019, at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company to be held on Thursday, May 16, 2019, at 10:00 a.m., local time, at the Company’s corporate headquarters, 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Tennessee, and at any adjournments or postponements thereof.

This proxy, when properly executed, will be voted in the manner directed herein. If no such direction is made, this proxy will be voted in accordance with the Board of Directors’ recommendations.

PLEASE SIGN, DATE AND RETURN PROMPTLY IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.

 

 

Address Changes/Comments:

`

(If you noted any Address Changes/Comments above, please mark corresponding box on the reverse side.)

Continued and to be signed on reverse side

(If you noted any Address Changes/Comments above, please mark corresponding box on the reverse side.)

Continued and to be signed on reverse side