Argentina 
Colombia 
Demo 
Democratic Republic of Congo 
Ecuador 
Mongolia 
Mozambique 
Nepal 
Philippines 
Tuvalu 
Zambia 
Zimbabwe Nepal
The Community Trust Index (CTI) in Nepal assesses levels of trust in both the Nepal Red Cross Society and flood Early Warning Systems. The programme included an Institutional Trust Module conducted in 2025 and an Early Warning System Module implemented between 2025 and 2026. Together, these assessments examine perceptions of organizational competencies, values, and the effectiveness of early warning and anticipatory action systems, providing insights to strengthen community engagement, accountability, and disaster preparedness.
Transparency is the clear trust gap
The Red Cross is trusted more for what it does than for how it communicates
Receiving support does not automatically translate into high trust.
Trust in the Early Warning System is moderate
Trust is strongest in the Preparedness & Response and Warning & Communication pillars
Receiving early warnings improves trust
Transparency and participation remains areas of improvement
Overall ScoreIndex scoreThe overall score is the average of the competences and values scores. The competency and values scores are the arithmetic mean of the scores for each sub-dimension. The sub-dimension scores are generated from the weighted average of the response rates to the questions relating to each sub-dimension, using the following weightings.
Early Warning
The Community Trust Index (CTI) survey was conducted by the Nepal Red Cross Society (NRCS) as part of the Building Trust initiative to assess community trust in the flood Early Warning System (EWS). Using a standardized questionnaire, NRCS volunteers collected data across three survey waves between 2025 and 2026 in selected districts of western Nepal, the Kathmandu Valley, and Koshi Province. A total of 5,309 people participated in the survey, of whom 4,958 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis.
In 2026, the Early Warning System achieved a Community Trust Index score of 5.7 out of 10, reflecting a moderate level of trust. The highest-rated dimensions were Warning & Communication and Preparedness & Response (5.9), while Monitoring & Forecast received the lowest score (5.4).
Findings
The Community Trust Index results indicate a moderate level of trust in the Nepal Red Cross-supported flood Early Warning System, with an average score of 5.9 out of 10 across all pillars. Overall, respondents expressed more positive perceptions of Warning Dissemination & Communication and Preparedness & Response Capacities, while Detection, Monitoring & Forecasting received comparatively lower ratings.
Across pillars, effectiveness and feedback emerged as relative strengths of the system, whereas participation and transparency consistently received lower scores, highlighting opportunities to strengthen community engagement and accountability. Trust levels were also influenced by respondents’ characteristics and experiences. Higher scores were reported among individuals with greater educational attainment, those who had previously received support from the Nepal Red Cross, and those who had received early warning information through Red Cross channels. In contrast, lower scores were observed among older respondents and individuals with limited engagement with early warning activities.
The findings suggest that direct interaction with early warning services and Red Cross activities plays an important role in shaping trust, while efforts to improve participation, transparency, and outreach to less-engaged groups could further strengthen confidence in the Early Warning System.
Trust in the Early Warning System is moderate
Trust is strongest in the Preparedness & Response and Warning & Communication pillars
Receiving early warnings improves trust
Transparency and participation remains areas of improvement
Contact
Lead
Nepal Red Cross Society
Partners
FRC Nepal, IFRC Asia-Pacific, IFRC HQ
Population
- All Respondents
- Men
- Women
Region
Age Group
Export charts
Charts will be available for export after the data loads.
The survey sample differs slightly from the population distribution across surveyed districts, with some areas over- or under-represented. Results have been adjusted where appropriate and should be interpreted as representative of the surveyed communities.
Results should be interpreted with caution, as some districts are over- or under-represented in the sample, and Pillars 1 and 2 were assessed only in Koshi Province, while Pillars 3 and 4 reflect all survey locations.