Besides the technocrats, members of the public may be randomly selected to enhance inclusivity and objectivity of policies. In the US, Congress, federal bureaucrats and state agencies participate in formulation of national policies. At the community level, policy construction requires coordinated efforts of local organizations like churches, interest groups and representatives of community members. In case a policy initiative impacts an entire community, no single party will dominate in formulation deliberations. Each of the parties involved gets a proportionate chance of contribution (Adrian, 2007).
Professionally, development of a policy initiative follows procedural steps. The first step involves recognition of a problem. At the community level, common problems may include increase in drug addiction among the youth, rise in mugging incidents, and poor community policing among others. The second step involves setting the agenda, also referred to as criteria development. Agenda setting entails appraising the depth and breadth of the problem in order to develop a prioritization scale. Thirdly, a policy is formulated based on information from the developed agenda. Development of a policy involves explicitly defining the course actions needed to achieve a desired goal. The fourth step of policy development is adoption and implementation of the course actions. For successful implementation, distinct parties will be tasked with ensuring execution of specific action plans. Lastly, the policy process is evaluated in order to ascertain its effectiveness, and necessary corrective actions performed (Smith, 2013).
Personally, I would be at the forefront in any policy making initiative concerning my community. As insinuated earlier, some policy initiatives within a given community has the potential to impact all members. In this case, inclusive contribution will ensure representativeness of adopted action plans. In my community, there is a remote yet distinct