Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Where a party seeks to modify the child support provision contained in a prior order or judgment, he or she must demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances ( see Domestic Relations Law 236 [B] [9] [b]; Love v. Love, 303 AD2d 756; Weiss v. Weiss, 294 AD2d 566). Among the factors to be considered in determining whether there has been a substantial change in circumstances are "the increased needs of the children due to special circumstances or to the additional activities of growing children . . ., the increased cost of living insofar as it results in greater expenses for the children . . ., a loss of income or assets by a parent or a substantial improvement in the financial condition of a parent . . ., and the current and prior life-styles of the children" ( Matter of Brescia v. Fitts, 56 NY2d 132, 141).
The defendant failed to show a substantial change in circumstances. He offered only generalized testimony that the child's needs increased because she was older ( see Cadwell v. Cadwell, 294 AD2d 434; DeCarlo v. DeCarlo, 250 AD2d 848; cf. Jones v. Jones, 239 AD2d 419). Although the plaintiff's income increased, that factor alone was not determinative in deciding whether to grant an upward modification ( see Love v. Love, supra; Matter of Rosenthal v. Buck, 281 AD2d 909).