This study was conducted in three selected agro-ecologies to characterize the husbandryrnpractices, adoption and impact of village poultry technology packages in the central OromiarnRegion, Ethiopia. Using multi-stage random sampling method, 180 technology participants werernselected. Structured questionnaire, field observations and focus group discussions werernemployed to collect quantitative and qualitative information. Chemical composition of feedrnsamples was analyzed using proximate analysis. Descriptive statistics was used to evaluate thernhusbandry practices of the technology. Binary logistic regression was employed to assess therndeterminant factors of technology adoption. Ranked variables were analyzed using NPAR1WAYrnWilcoxon procedures. Logit model propensity score matching procedures was used to assess thernimpact of the technology. Scavenging chicken production system with some feed supplementrnwas dominantly practiced by technology participants. Overall about 44.6%, 38.7% and 16.7%rnlocal, exotic and crossbred chicken breeds were kept in the production systems, respectively. Arnmean of 17.8(2.50), 13.4(2.17) and 11.2(1.25) chicken were owned per household in thernhighland, mid-altitude and lowland agro-ecologies, respectively. Most of the respondentsrn(65.6%) practiced crossbreeding of these 59.4% conducted uncontrolled breeding. Thernsupplement feeds had very good CP and ME contents but home mixed ration I had lower CPrncontent. About Â½ of the respondents constructed separate chicken house. However, duringrnhousing, 68.3% didnâ€™t consider the space requirements of the chicken. Newcastle disease was thernmajor challenging and killing disease in the study areas. Respondents received a mean ofrn4.7(0.80) pullets with cockerel and 10.1(1.25) pullets for the technology but their demands werernxxrn64.0(6.11) and 97.9(16.27) pullets with cockerels and only pullets, respectively. Technologyrninputs dissemination was not well organized. Improved chicken breed adoption was better asrncompared to other technology elements. Respondents residing in the mid-altitude agro-ecologyrnwere better adopters of improved chicken feeds and feeding, housing, healthcare and waterrnprovision. Bovan Brown chicken breed adoption was higher (26.1%) than other chicken breeds.rnThe adoption of pullets with cockerels technology form was higher (22.2%) than the rest forms.rnThe overall adoption status of the technology was 39.4%. The adoption level of the technologyrnwas categorized as low level. The overall technology adoption was significantly influenced byrnextension (P