Ordered that the order is modified, on the facts, by deleting from the penultimate paragraph thereof the amount $2,447.08 and substituting therefor the amount $247.08; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court properly sustained the mother's objections to the Support Magistrate's order granting his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation. A court may modify a child support order derived from a stipulation of settlement that is incorporated but not merged into a judgment of divorce upon a showing of an unreasonable and unanticipated change in circumstances justifying the modification ( see Matter of Davis v. Davis, 13 AD3d 623, lv denied 5 NY3d 746). "[A]lthough a loss of employment can constitute a change in circumstances warranting a downward modification of child support," the father failed to "present competent proof that his change in circumstance was not of his own making . . ., or that he thereafter `used his best efforts to obtain employment commensurate with his qualifications and experience'" ( Matter of Heyward v. Goldman, 23 AD3d 468, 469 [internal citations omitted], quoting Matter of D'Altilio v. D'Altilio, 14 AD3d 701).
Furthermore, the Family Court properly rendered a decision on the mother's objections without the aid of a hearing transcript, since the Family Court reviewed the Support Magistrate's findings of fact, which summarized the testimony at the hearing ( see Matter of Cook v. Bornhorst, 230 AD2d 934; Matter of Smith v. Smith, 197 AD2d 830).
We note that the order on appeal contains a scrivener's error, and states that the Support Magistrate's order dated October 20, 2004, directs the father to pay $2,447.08 in weekly support, when that order in fact directs the father to pay $247.08 in weekly support. We therefore modify the order on appeal accordingly.