In other studies [16] attention is given to the problem of management and planning of the post-earthquake emergency within an urban area, in order to provide a measure of the resources and equipment needed during rescue activities. The proposed method is based on the availability of damage quantification reports, to be assessed immediately after the event through the completion of specific forms (AeDES forms). None of the above studies addressed the problem of the optimal budget definition and allocation for regional seismic risk mitigation. [PERSON] et al. [17] proposed an automated model for optimizing budget allocation in earthquake mitigation scenarios through an iterative procedure looking for a retrofitting strategy with a cost within the available budget. The procedure integrates HAZUS vulnerability classes and parameters for several building typologies, similarly to the method proposed by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [18] that additionally introduced the concept of equity in the distribution of resources among different groups of people. In the approach proposed by [PERSON] et al. [19], the optimal budget allocation for seismic risk mitigation was achieved through the analysis of a wide range of possible retrofit strategies for the buildings stock, based on the seismic vulnerability of each building. This allows for a dense cloud of cost-benefit scenarios to be obtained, where the cost corresponds to the needed territorial investment and the benefit is the achieved seismic risk mitigation. The optimal retrofit solution can be selected among the possible scenarios as the one that allows minimization of the seismic risk given the available budget. This procedure can provide significant support to decision makers in planning appropriate seismic risk mitigation strategies since they are able to provide a global and comprehensive overview of the costs and benefits associated with a very large number of different scenarios. However, handling the huge amount of data that is consequent to the application of this procedure is a challenging task that can discourage its effective use. Indeed, differently to the methodologies suggested in [17; 18], where loss analyses are performed by means of the HAZUS external tool, in [19] the seismic risk and loss assessment is performed for each building belonging to the portfolio. This implies that not only does the output cost-benefit analysis generate a large amount of information, but also managing the input data could be an issue. This is the motivation behind the present work that integrates and organizes the procedure proposed in [19] on an Italian geo-referenced platform, freely available online, allowing an interactive implementation of a decision-making assessment for the prioritization of regional seismic retrofit interventions, satisfying a financial constraint. Basically, the decision process is divided into two sections: (1) collection of building stock data to perform seismic risk assessment and calculate the risk of failure at each building of class and then (2) management and mitigation of seismic risk through prioritization of interventions and optimal budget allocation. Decision making concerns any intervention for all included buildings that may or may not be subjected to the seismic retrofit, based on the defined strategy to reduce the expected future loss. The platform is herein presented for the case study of a school building's stock in the Campania region in south Italy, but it could be customized for any typology of building portfolio in any area. An interactive tab enables the user to select the available budget for the risk mitigation investment: as a result, the platform returns the optimal seismic retrofit strategy to be adopted for each building belonging to the portfolio under study. In addition, the evolution of territorial seismic risk in the post-retrofit environment is shown on the Campania region map, allowing a prompt comparison with respect to the initial (i.e., pre-retrofit) seismic risk.