DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The father's contention that the mother failed to show a change in circumstances warranting an upward modification of child support is unpreserved for appellate review, as that issue was not raised before the hearing examiner or in the objections before the Family Court (see Matter of Coleman v Thomas, 295 A.D.2d 508). In any event, the mother successfully demonstrated a change in circumstances by setting forth specific increased expenses of the two subject children (see Family Court Act § 461[b][ii]; Matter of Michaels v. Michaels, 56 N.Y.2d 924, 926; Matter of Staffanell v. Staffanell, 220 A.D.2d 751). Furthermore, the court correctly applied the Child Support Standards Act formula in arriving at the amount of the upward modification, as application of that formula is mandatory (see Family Court Act § 413[c]; Bast v. Rossoff, 91 N.Y.2d 723, 728; Matter of Thomas v. DeFalco, 270 A.D.2d 277, 278; Matter of Alice C. v. Bernard G. C., 193 A.D.2d 97, 111).
The father's remaining contentions are without merit.
SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.