Is the concept of a reason the most basic normative concept, as some deontologists think, or is value more basic, as consequentialists think? This chapter concerns normative reasons, the distinction between those and normative grounds, and the relation of both to value. Reasons are commonly considered facts. The chapter develops a non-factive account of practical reasons, explains why taking account of such ascriptions is important, and challenges the factivity view of reasons. It argues that reasons are grounded, and thereby not unqualifiedly basic, even if the concept of a reason is irreducible. If reasons are grounded in the way described, they can still do the jobs we take them to do, but they are better understood in the wider context the chapter provides. This context includes that of ascriptions of intrinsic value. Intrinsic value is reason-grounding in ways that reflect both our experiences and our understanding of action for reasons.