Results found little indication that a coherent accountability ideal emerged to effectively reorganize juvenile justice. Historical analysis suggests that a two-stage and limited philosophical displacement of the rehabilitative ideal occurred, beginning with discourse and policy focused on system accountability reforms in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, followed by juvenile accountability reform efforts since the 1980s that mirror the punitive tenor of broader juvenile justice and criminal justice policy reform. The balance of these reforms is not clearly reflected in the accountability orientation of juvenile court professionals. Juvenile court workers surveyed in this study were most inclined to support an accountability ideal that prioritizes rehabilitation. Except for persecutors, few decisionmakers responding to the survey indicated significant preference for a juvenile accountability model over a system accountability framework. Shifting juvenile code, harsh rhetoric, and Federal incentives to become more punitive in the handling of delinquency notwithstanding, more decisionmakers appear to remain inclined to advocate traditional rehabilitative principles of juvenile social control. Data were collected through a self-administered survey of 665 decisionmakers in 12 Midwestern juvenile courts of 4 States with 3 courts in each State. Tables, notes, and references