This article questions the negative outlook on the democratic accountability in public–private partnerships (PPPs). It challenges this widely held perception in the literature with the empirical findings of a case study of Flemish school infrastructure (Belgium). A large design, build, finance, and maintenance (DBFM) programme is compared with the regular subsidizing system through the public agency AGIOn (Agency for School Infrastructure). This case study demonstrates that more accountability forums and actors can be active in the PPP, that they can behave more actively in the PPP, and that they get results in terms of accountability. It provides a critical example of having more accountability in the PPP variant of school infrastructure than in direct public provision, and there are reasons to argue that this also means improved accountability, because internal and latent processes of accountability become external and actual ones.