Background: The Ohangwena region experiences outbreaks that occur annually with varying severity. The purpose of this research paper was to explore and describe perceptions and experiences of rural communities on the western and Indigenous practices of malaria prevention in the Ohangwena region Method: A convergent parallel mixed method was used. The qualitative, explorative, contextual phenomenological, quantitative, descriptive, analytic, and cross-sectional study design was conducted. Multistage sampling was used, including random sampling with replacement and purposive sampling. The quantitative data was electronically analyzed with the Statistical Package of Social Science and manually using Tesch’s steps for qualitative data. The tools used were a survey and an interview. The information was collected with a questionnaire from 402 respondents. The interview guide was used in qualitative data from individual interviews and focus group discussions. The actual number of interviews was determined by saturation. Results: Unemployment is high among the respondents, at 62.6%The finding indicated that the respondents obtained a mosquito net from free distribution, The Ministry of Health and Social Service accounts for 66.2%, followed by free donations from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) like Trans-Kunene initiatives, churches, and the Red Cross represented by 15,8 compared to 13.6% responded who bought nets for themselves. The lowest percentage, 4.4 %, received free nets from friends and family. The factors that prevent the use of the net are expensive, 68,7%, 12.7% of respondents experienced discomfort while fearing itching. and not a priority yielded 9.3%. Most of the respondents, 62,6%, are unemployed and depend on free net distribution. The findings revealed that the respondents are from low-salary occupations. prevent them from owning the net. The participants indicated that nets are not affordable and not user-friendly, as they cause discomfort, such as itching. On the other hand, problems of lack of income and unemployment make it difficult. The three themes emerged: Dependency on free distribution of net, limited universal coverage and reduced utility of traditional preventive practices in the community, and low confidence in teaching undocumented information among health extension. The findings confirmed that rural community depends solely on free net distribution campaigns of the MoHSS as the main source and some donor organizations. They also narrated that there are no retail shops for net in the villages. The participants said they relied on the free net campaign, but they experienced waiting longer to receive. From the focus group discussion, participants perceive indoor residual sprays and nets as the best malaria prevention practices. However, they are not adequate for everyone. The indoor residual spray team is only applied in selected villages where confirmed positive cases are diagnosed. Despite positive diagnosis cases, some house structures are not accessible for spraying. We are not confident in indigenous practice, as they are not documented in the training manual. Conclusion: The net free distribution creates dependency among rural communities. The inadequacy of Western interventions calls for strengthening the use of Indigenous practices in combating malaria to complement the insufficient for indoor residual sprays and long-lasting nets. It was recommended that Western intervention and Indigenous practices need equal advocacy and complement each other to achieve sustainable malaria prevention and care, maximize resources, and bridge the resource gap.