Movement strengthening· High risk

Review a policy for clarity and completeness

Get a plain-language critique of an existing policy document.

Higher-risk prompt — human review is required before you act on the output.

This prompt touches safeguarding, wellbeing, funding claims or public communications. Verify facts, remove personal details and check with a colleague before using the result.

I understand and will review the output with a human before use.

When to use this prompt

Reach for this prompt when you need to get a plain-language critique of an existing policy document. It's designed for CEO, HR lead, Board member. Typically used within Governance work.

Not suitable for real-time decisions about individuals, safeguarding cases, or public claims without human sign-off.

How to use it

1
Gather your inputs
You'll need: Policy text, Policy purpose.
Nice to have: Audience, Legal jurisdiction hints.
2
Fill in the template
Copy the template below and replace every bracketed placeholder with real, local context. Keep names and safeguarding details out.
3
Run it in your AI tool
Paste into your preferred AI assistant. Ask a follow-up if the output misses your association's tone or context.
4
Review with the checklist
Work through the human-review checklist below before you send, publish or act on the output.

Prefer a guided flow? Adapt with the guided builder — it fills placeholders from your association profile.

Prompt template

Review the policy below for: clarity, gaps, ambiguity, inclusivity of language, and alignment with YMCA values. Do not provide legal advice. Flag anything that appears to touch safeguarding, employment law, data protection, or child protection as requiring qualified human review.\n\nPolicy: {{policy}}

Replace bracketed placeholders with real context. Never paste identifying details about children, health or safeguarding cases.

Human review checklist

Tick each before you send or publish the output.

Have safeguarding/legal sections been routed to a qualified reviewer?
Are suggested edits truly improvements, or just rephrasing?
Does the updated policy still reflect your local context and law?

Why this prompt works

Explicitly telling the AI it is not a legal adviser and to route sensitive areas to humans keeps risk contained.

Related prompts

Create a board briefing note
Turn operational detail into a clear briefing for governance decision-makers.

Was this useful?

Adapt with the guided builder