(a) Evaluation. All proposals received from eligible applicants in accordance with eligible research problem or program areas and deadlines established in the applicable request for proposals shall be evaluated by the Director through such officers, employees, and others as the Director determines are uniquely qualified in the areas of research represented by particular projects. To assist in equitably and objectively evaluating proposals and to obtain the best possible balance of viewpoints, the Director shall solicit the advice of peer scientists, ad hoc reviewers, or others who are recognized specialists in the research program areas covered by the applications received and whose general roles are defined in §§ 3400.2(j) and 3400.2(k). Specific evaluations will be based upon the criteria established in subpart B § 3400.15, unless NIFA determines that different criteria are necessary for the proper evaluation of proposals in one or more specific program areas, and announces such criteria and their relative importance in the annual program solicitation. The overriding purpose of such evaluations is to provide information upon which the Director can make informed judgments in selecting proposals for ultimate support. Incomplete, unclear, or poorly organized applications will work to the detriment of applicants during the peer evaluation process. To ensure a comprehensive evaluation, all applications should be written with the care and thoroughness accorded papers for publication.

(b) Disposition. On the basis of the Director's evaluation of an application in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, the Director will

(1) Approve support using currently available funds,

(2) Defer support due to lack of funds or a need for further evaluations, or

(3) Disapprove support for the proposed project in whole or in part.