Is anybody in charge of Maryland's chronically disorganized and dysfunctional Department of Juvenile Services? You'd be hard-pressed to think so given two scathing reports this week. They found the DJS is plagued by sloppy paperwork and lax security procedures that may not only have contributed to the death last year of a youth detention facility staff member but also caused the agency to needlessly waste millions of dollars while failing to rehabilitate troubled youth or safely reintegrate them into their communities.

An audit by the state Department of Legislative Services found that the DJS failed to consistently implement or review treatment plans for the youths committed to its care — and lost $3 million in Medicaid matching funds as a result. It also neglected to properly document the supervision of some troubled teens, calling into question whether this was simply a bureaucratic lapse or whether anyone was even keeping an eye on those kids. And it failed to submit contracts to the state Board of Public Works on time, forcing the spending panel to approve nearly $150 million in agreements after the work had already begun. Even then, DJS officials didn't always monitor payments to the contractors or perform quality control to make sure the state was getting what it paid for.

Meanwhile, a separate investigation by the state's Juvenile Justice Monitoring Unit into security procedures at the Cheltenham Youth Facility found the campus lacked basic security equipment and that staff there frequently ignored rules for keeping youngsters within sight and earshot. In the death of Hannah Wheeling, a 65-year-old English teacher who worked at the facility, monitors found that the now-14-year-old boy accused in her death and another student were allowed to stay with her alone in a downstairs classroom because of shortages of trained staff. It also found there was little control over access to keys to secure areas.

All these problems point to a lack of leadership at the top of the troubled agency. DJS Secretary Donald W. DeVore insists that the problems at DJS are being corrected and that its programs to help young people turn around their lives are working. He points to the federal government's decision to stop its intensive monitoring at some DJS facilities as a sign of how much progress the agency is making.

But this week's revelations show that whatever progress the federal government saw, it isn't enough. The department seems incapable of putting its administrative and fiscal houses in order, not to mention providing safe and secure environments for state workers and the young people under its charge. The DJS has made some progress toward improving the deplorable living conditions youth in its care once endured, but it still seems to be constantly lurching from one crisis to the next.

Moreover, the department has yet to come through on implementing the long-promised successful treatment models of states like Missouri, which emphasize intensive counseling for youths and their families in community-based treatment settings that allow staffers to closely monitor kids' progress while working to prepare them for release. As a result, thousands of youngsters are falling through the cracks, putting themselves and their communities at even greater risk.

Former Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. came into office almost eight years ago promising to fix the department, which had been troubled for years. He didn't. Gov. Martin O'Malley came into office nearly four years ago promising that new, experienced management would solve the DJS' problems. It didn't. Perhaps that's why neither one of them is talking much about juvenile justice in this election.

But they need to now. We've known for years what works and who to look to for examples. We need to find ways to provide intensive services to those juveniles who can stay in the community with their families, and we need to make sure that kids who must be held in secure detention facilities also get the kinds of individualized treatment that will eventually enable them to return home.

There's remarkably little debate about that among experts and advocates — or, for that matter, between Mr. Ehrlich and Mr. O'Malley. But if we're ever going to move DJS to fulfill the mission it was set up to accomplish, we need the candidates to tell us how they're going to stop talking about it and finally start doing it.