Planning with Purpose: Meet MMPI Leader Rumanda Young
Meet Rumanda Young, a leader within the Military Master Planning Institute (MMPI) and a planning and design professional with more than two decades of Department of Defense experience. With a background in landscape architecture, master planning, urban planning, and policy, Rumanda has helped shape MMPI into a program grounded in real-world problem-solving, resilience, and collaboration.
Q: Can you tell me about yourself and your background leading up to your role with the MMPI program?
A: I am a planning and design professional with a background specifically in landscape architecture, master planning, and urban plan
ning. My Ph.D. also focused on how policy impacts that work. Tying all of that to where I have gone in my career, my work has focused on planning infrastructure strategy and areas such as resilient community development.
Before becoming involved with the Department of Defense, I worked with communities outside of defense. For the past 21 years, I’ve been with the Department of Defense doing the same types of things. My perspective, and why I came into this field, is a little different than most people. I really began by thinking about land stewardship and the planning of our resources.
This was deeply shaped by where I grew up and how I grew up. I was raised within a Native American cultural context where land was not viewed simply as a commodity, but as a living system. The land had memory, responsibility, and a relationship to people. From a very early age, I was taught that our land, and how we plan our land, is not something we simply use, it is something we care for and learn from.
We have a generational mindset about it, in how we consider and craft land across generations. That worldview has stayed with me from the very beginning and has instilled a strong ethic of respect, restraint, and reciprocity in how I approach development, change, and decision-making. It requires accounting for long-term impacts, especially when considering cultural meaning and community continuity.
Those values continue to guide how I approach planning, design, and redevelopment, and the work I do today with the federal government. It continues to be my north star—making sure we’re not simply meeting the mission in front of us, but also thinking about long-term lifecycle strategies. It’s more about an ethic that I have towards responsibility and resilience, and also just cultural care.
Q: What is your affiliation to the MMPI program?
A: My affiliation started because of my background. I’ve always had one part of my professional career that is completely different, which has been teaching. Once I started with the D.O.D., one of the things I said was that I wanted to continue teaching on the side. I have done that for 21 years with the D.O.D., and they have approved and supported me in doing that.
One of the things I’ve been able to be involved with is a group under the D.O.D. called ERDC, a think tank laboratory. Specifically, I am involved with what they call the Applied Research Planning Center. In that center, we are able to test, pilot, and invent new ideas, and then evaluate whether they would work on our military installations or with other nation partners we’re working with.
It is a very research-and-development type of role, and it aligns perfectly with academia because I’m also teaching at the same time. When headquarters began discussing the creation of a robust, professional training program, they tasked me with helping craft the program. They asked me to help identify what kinds of courses were already out there and what people were already training on, but also to develop an actual curriculum and help bring that to life with UVA.
We looked at several different universities and really focused on what UVA offered — its connection to the federal realm, the rich history of the university, and specifically the School of Architecture and its Urban Planning program. It had such a strong history, and that is where this program found a home. It has been a wonderful fit.
Q: What can participants expect to learn from this program?
A: Participants can expect to gain practical, real-world planning skills. It’s not just theory. Students get to practice working in groups, often under pressure, and at real sites. In this program, it’s not just about talking through concepts; it’s about examining real-world scenarios and having students use actual tools and policies to solve problems.
Every single course, from communications courses to resiliency courses, has a practical problem-solving project associated with it. The program emphasizes not only integrative planning across a variety of perspectives and disciplines, but also the ability to solve problems within a specific scenario. There is significant stakeholder alignment involved, and participants must develop decision frameworks while practicing the use of tools that translate challenges into executable plans.
I think that is one of the best outcomes of the program. Not just understanding policy and theory, but engaging in real-world, collaborative projects. Participants are also able to meet other individuals and broaden their connections with fellow planners. You learn so much from others in these courses, and you meet many people who expand your network and professional resources.
Q: Do you have a favorite course in this program or is there a particular course that participants enjoy the most?
A: I love the advanced master planning course. It’s the final capstone and I love that project because it is a studio project that really brings together all the elements of the program. You come into this course and spend three days with a group of fellow learners, focused on a real project and a real stakeholder. You are working through scenario evaluation and solving an actual planning problem, and it really brings everything together, from land use to infrastructure to planning.
It is the best mirror of what real planning feels like in an office, with the types of challenges you face, because everyone is sitting there with different ideas and priorities. It truly allows for interdisciplinary learning and collaboration.
One amazing project we worked on was the Arlington National Cemetery project, where we focused on one area of their development plans. Normally our planning has a short, mid, and long range timeline that we look at, and we typically don’t look past 30 years. For this project, they came to us and asked us to look 100 to 150 years into the future. I have never been part of a course or project with that kind of long-term perspective. It required us to think far outside the traditional planning timelines. It was a very interesting project that pushed us beyond the conventional planning framework and into what we wanted the site to be 150 years from now.
Q: Has this program shaped your career path or your day-to-day responsibilities in your current roles?
A: It has! One of the things that has come out of this program is the emphasis on resilience. It’s a new course in the program, and it required me to learn more about resilience and the planning components associated with it. This connects directly to our overarching policy, which has increasingly focused on the idea of how to future-proof systems and facilities.
Some of the programs I’m currently working on are very much influenced by what I’ve been learning and understanding about resilience. For example, one area I probably never would have focused on as deeply is modular facilities, because they can be significantly more resilient. I am currently growing a program with the Air Force that specifically examines resilience through modular building strategies. I find myself going back and reviewing materials from the class because they directly relate to my work. That is one of the benefits of having such a robust curriculum. The opportunity to learn from it even as we continue developing and teaching it. It is actively shaping the direction of my research.
Q: Do you have a favorite memory from being a part of this program?
A: A memory of something that is unique to this program is the addition of the new communications course. That course is very new to planning, and it’s something we’ve always needed. Those courses have been incredibly fun, and it is so enjoyable to learn from everyone, especially since there isn’t just one method planners use to communicate. The projects we’ve worked on have been very impressive, allowing us to apply our skills in real-world settings. It has been a very fun course to be involved with.
Q: What advice would you give to someone who is considering this program?
A: I would say come ready to think broadly. One of the shifts we have moved into with this program is that, originally, the Army was primarily focused on Army planning and what we did. That is now changing. Everything is becoming much more integrated at the D.O.D. level. This does not mean the Army will do the same things as the Air Force or the Navy, but we are broadening the lens to where we’re all working together.
I would encourage participants to come ready to think beyond their Army lens or Navy lens, because the program now goes way beyond traditional training. Even the way plans are developed, stored, and integrated operates at a much higher and more unified level. This shift changes how students think and broadens their perspective under a larger umbrella, where policy and implementation are increasingly aligned.
Also, come ready to work practically. We engage in exercises, ask questions, and build connections through real-world projects and scenarios. The more you put into the program and apply its tools, the more value you will get out of it.