The Abbi Agency, the CARES Campus, and the Karma Box Project
A story about when public policy, and “pro-bono” marketing collide with allegations of abuse, influence and neglect.
Feb 02, 2026
Recently, The Abbi Agency issued a press release announcing its initiative to offer pro bono marketing services to selected nonprofit organizations.
According to the release, in 2025, Abbi selected four nonprofits to receive free marketing and communications support. One of those organizations was The Karma Box Project.
Link: Applications Now Open for Abbi Agency’s “Do Good Stuff” Initiative
On its face, this is the kind of announcement that usually passes without scrutiny. A prominent Reno-based marketing firm donating its expertise to nonprofits appears to be a net positive for the community.
But when you look more closely at how those nonprofits intersect with publicly funded systems already facing controversy, the picture becomes more complicated.
This article examines relationships, overlaps, the role of marketing in shaping public perception, and a bad choice.
Do these cheerful-looking women know that they are promoting an organization that has had multiple women make claims of abuse against it and its director and employees?
Who Runs the Karma Box Project
The Karma Box Project is run by Grant Denton, a prominent figure in Reno’s homelessness services ecosystem.
Karma Box is not a peripheral organization. It plays a direct operational role in Washoe County’s most extensive and most expensive homelessness initiative: the CARES Campus.
Karma Box operates the intake program at the CARES Campus, the first point of contact for unhoused individuals seeking shelter.
Karma Box is at the center of a program that has drawn increasing scrutiny.
Karma Box, CARES Campus, and the Phone They Didn’t Want to Give Back to a Victim
This is the story of Marissa, who is married to an employee of Karma Box, and how she was abused by him and by them.
The CARES Campus and Public Concerns
The CARES Campus was launched with ambitious promises: coordinated services, reduced street homelessness, and better outcomes for individuals in crisis.
What has followed has been far messier.
Since opening, the CARES Campus has been associated with:
Significant cost overruns
Frequent police responses and emergency calls
Ongoing complaints from nearby residents and businesses
Questions about accountability, transparency, and effectiveness
None of this is speculative; it is reflected in public records, police logs, commission meetings, and resident testimony.
Despite this, the CARES Campus has also benefited from professionally produced messaging that emphasizes success stories, innovation, and a compassion-forward brand.
That matters — because public perception influences political will, funding decisions, and institutional inertia.
The CARES Campus: When Public Relations Becomes Public Policy
The Abbi Agency provides coverage of the CARES Campus with heartwarming articles that obscure reality.
Abbi Agency’s Dual Role
Here is where the overlap becomes relevant.
The Abbi Agency has done marketing and communications work for the CARES Campus. At the same time, it selected Karma Box—the organization that runs CARES intake—as a recipient of free pro bono marketing services. Again, this article is not alleging wrongdoing. But it does raise a legitimate question:
Should a PR firm meaningfully shape public narratives around a controversial public program while simultaneously donating services to one of that program’s core operators — influencing how criticism is framed, minimized, or redirected?
Marketing Is Not Neutral
Marketing is not just logos and social media posts. It is:
Message framing
Story selection
Language choices
Crisis response strategy
What gets highlighted — and what quietly disappears
When a nonprofit or public initiative faces criticism, the communications strategy often determines whether the issue is perceived as systemic failure or isolated growing pains. Pro bono work does not eliminate that influence. If anything, it can deepen alignment.
Allegations and Public Trust
The Karma Box Project and Grant Denton are central to a controversy.
I published an article telling the story of Kimberly, who alleged Denton abused her during a personal relationship. That article was written at her request and based on her account and documentation she gave to me.
There has been no criminal conviction associated with those allegations. However, public trust in organizations serving vulnerable populations does not hinge solely on court outcomes. It hinges on transparency, accountability, and how institutions respond when concerns are raised.
When the same individual is:
Running a nonprofit embedded in a significant public program
Managing intake for a taxpayer-funded campus
Benefiting from professional reputation-management support
…it becomes reasonable to ask whether marketing is being used as insulation rather than communication.
An Account, a Warning, and a Story About a System That Protected an Insider
This is Kimberly’s story of how she was abused by Grant Denton and how the authorities covered for him and ignored her.
Why This Matters
The issue here is not whether nonprofits deserve free marketing help.
The issue is whether powerful narrative-shaping firms should be simultaneously involved in:
Promoting a controversial public facility
Supporting a nonprofit that operates inside that facility
Helping shape how the public understands both
Helping to cover up allegations of abuse
Performing reputation repair for individuals accused of abuse
Especially when that public facility has cost millions, generated thousands of police calls, and continues to face unresolved concerns.
The Question in the future
The Abbi Agency is entitled to select its pro bono partners.
Karma Box is entitled to seek marketing support.
But the public is also entitled to ask:
How narratives around homelessness are constructed
Who benefits from those narratives
Whether marketing has replaced accountability
Those questions are not anti-nonprofit. They are pro-public. People need to know what is going on.