The EA Opportunities Board now has full-time roles
The Effective Altruism Opportunities board now lists full-time roles alongside internships, fellowships, and volunteering opportunities. We’re aiming for it to be a curated home for EA opportunities across all cause areas.
If you’re actively looking for a role you might want to check out the board, and if you’re only passively looking you might want to sign up for the newsletter to get a weekly digest of impactful roles.
History
The Effective Altruism Opportunities Board was originally aimed at helping people find internships, volunteering opportunities, and part-time roles to build skills or contribute to impactful work. It was run by students and young professionals for a long time, and has had multiple iterations over the years.
The Online team at CEA took over the board early 2025, and I started giving it focused attention beginning this year. In April we decided to start listing full-time roles.
Why we added full-time roles
After taking over the board I was exploring if the current niche was still what visitors expected and wanted, and whether it was filling a gap. The board’s niche was defined back when 80,000 Hours covered full-time roles across cause areas equally (without focusing more strongly on AI safety), and the supply of internships and entry-level roles was lower.
We tested demand in multiple ways. Apart from running user interviews, we ran a survey on the board asking what people were looking for (now with 800+ responses), and added full-time roles to the role-type filter (before we had any full-time listings), to see whether people would look for them organically. Full-time was the most mentioned role type in the survey and the most used filter. It also turned out 48% of the visitors to the board weren’t using other popular boards to find EA roles (such as 80,000 Hours or Probably Good).
So in April we started pulling in full-time roles, with help from 80,000 Hours (who are focusing more heavily on roles in AI safety) and Probably Good (who has a broader definition of impactful roles than we do)[1].
Numbers
Since full-time roles went live, visitors clicking through to a role has gone up from around 32% to 45%, and early signals on product-market fit are encouraging: in a recent survey 36 of 45 people (80%) said they would be very disappointed if they could no longer use the board (the aim is to be above 40%[2]).
Even before adding full-time roles, the board had become the most visited page on effectivealtruism.org.
Monthly visitors have grown from around 1.5k at the start of 2025 to around 7.9k now. Early July we had already hit our annual growth goal for the board.
Other improvements
We shipped a bunch of other improvements at around the same time as releasing the full-time roles.
The board now has an organisation filter, a salary filter, improved location visibility, better mobile design, dedicated SEO pages for specific role types, and many more quality-of-life improvements. We’ve also built better tracking and have started following up with organisations about placements where the applicant came from the board.
We’re looking to hire someone to own the board
I (Agnes) have been owning and developing the board since last year alongside my other design and product work at CEA, and am now heading out on parental leave.
In the past couple of months we’ve grown increasingly optimistic about the boards potential, and are therefore looking to hire a full-time product lead to develop it further and explore where it could go. We’ll post about the listing in the comments once it’s live.
A visual timeline
Early 2025, the board was still hosted on ea-internships.pory.app:
July 2025, we ported the board over to effectivealtruism.org:
October 2025 after the first batch of UI improvements:
July 2026 with full-time roles, new organization filter and salary filter, more info on collapsed card, improved UI and interactions:
Ways you can help
Share the board with someone who could use it: effectivealtruism.org/opportunities
If you want a weekly digest of impactful opportunities: Sign up for the newsletter
Give us feedback (via comments or this form)
For organisations: submit opportunities directly, and we’d love it if you let us know if you’ve had promising applicants come through the board
For group organisers: request a Slack integration
Thank you to those who’ve given feedback, answered surveys, or joined user interviews, it’s helped shape the direction of the board.
Also thankful to @Dane Valerie who is managing the day-to-day of the board and does a huge amount behind the scenes, @Sarah Cheng 🔸 and @Jamie_Harris who partnered with me on the project, and @Conor Barnes 🔶 from 80,000 Hours and @Itamar from Probably Good who generously shared knowledge, numbers, and job listings.
Visit the board
I’d love to know how ProbablyGood fits into this! Would be helpful for my organising of EA Cambridge, as we currently refer people to job boards depending on their interests
Thanks for the question! We’re excited to collaborate on this with CEA, as well as with other orgs who asked to source roles from our job board.
Based on our current understanding, here’s how we’re thinking of what to recommend:
For people interested in AI safety & policy: 80K has the clearest focus on roles within this cause area.
For people interested in roles where there’s more confidence in the expected impact: CEA’s board or the highlighted orgs filter on our board seem most relevant (~20% of the roles on our board fall under this filter, and the Opportunities Board includes most of those).
For people interested in a range of impactful roles across cause areas: Our (Probably Good’s) board has the widest coverage.
Thanks! This is super helpful. If the Opportunities Board has most of the part and full-time roles on 80k and PG’s highlighted, then I struggle to imagine why I would recommend anything besides the Opportunity board, unless someone wanted to know about the opportunities that are less likely to be impactful by EA lights.
I suppose one reason I might recommend anything else, is that 80k’s advisor bot integrates with the job board. Would be curious to hear from @Conor Barnes 🔶 and @Probably Good if I’m missing anything here.
Recommending lots of boards creates some friction in our 1-1s, but I may continue to recommend all 3 boards to most/all people if there are other reasons to do this.
Hi Jian,
Good question! I agree with Probably Good’s view of the trifecta between us (and I’d also highlight Animal Advocacy Careers for their animal welfare focus!).
I’d say that the recommendation comes down to the user’s focus. If the job seeker wants to find the best opportunities in light of expecting transformative AI in the coming years, the 80,000 Hours job board selects roles in light of that question, including roles for building career capital. If the job seeker is ambivalent on timelines to transformative AI, other boards will have more variety for them.
As to non-curatorial differences:
We all have different filters in light of our audiences’ needs, and in general I expect the experience to differ slightly between each board.
The team behind our advisor bot is also pushing hard to make it very useful to job seekers, and I have some exciting features planned for the end of the year that leverage 80k’s capacity. So you might actually see growing variance between the boards!
I’m sorry it’s frictive to recommend many boards, but I will say I’m also quite glad that we have multiple strong boards sharing excellent roles based on our different philosophies!
Happy to clarify: What you’re missing is that there are tons of impactful roles—and people who are interested in them—that aren’t part of our highlighted roles. It’s perfectly fine to focus on the subset of roles where there’s more confidence in the impact (though never certainty), which is why we’ve set up a filter for it. But we’ve designed our board primarily for people who are considering impactful roles both inside and outside that subset, which we expect to be the right call for many (when considering factors like fit, absorbency, counterfactual impact, etc.).
So we think that a potential way to view this is:
For someone who seems primarily interested in AI safety & policy, you can recommend 80K.
For someone who seems primarily interested in more traditional EA roles, you can recommend the Opportunities Board (or the highlighted filter on our board).
For someone who seems interested in a wider range of impactful roles across cause areas, you can recommend the Probably Good board.
There are also smaller differences, such as that 80K and us offer custom email alerts and are stricter about removing expired roles, but I expect these differences will narrow as the Opportunities Board develops, and the above seems like a useful heuristic.