Six datasets, traced to a source and rated for confidence
Every number in a finding traces to one of these files, or to a script in the model. Nothing on this site is entered by hand.
The model matches the calculation scripts built into the official form
data/extracted/cjd304-xfa.xml holds the calculation scripts
built into the 2025 CJ-D 304, the Massachusetts child support guidelines worksheet, extracted by
model/inspect_worksheet.py. Primary
source, executed directly; the model matches it on all six scenarios.
The model matches all 1,104 rows of the published support chart
data/extracted/guidelines-chart.json holds 1,104
income-to-support pairs, $0-$8,654/wk, from the 2025 Guidelines Chart. Checked against Table A,
no disagreement over one dollar (model/test_guidelines.py).
Three fifty-one-jurisdiction datasets, one fixed pattern
All three use the same fixed worked example (disclosed on about): payor $201,000/yr, other parent $570/wk, three children, no child care. Not a general claim.
tier-50-2026-09-05.json: the monthly order in 50 jurisdictions, equal time (s1) and primary custody (s2). Massachusetts: $4,388.48 / $4,714.22. Each state worked out twice and checked for errors. Massachusetts was also worked out a second time from scratch, without looking at the first result, and the two matched. Georgia excluded (its formula gives a lower order under primary custody than equal time).credit-at-122-2026-09-05.json: whether 122 overnights earns a formula credit, 51 jurisdictions. Tally: 28 yes, 23 no, Massachusetts among the 23. Profile text, one pass per jurisdiction;basisnames rows revised.ceilings-2026-09-06.json: where each schedule stops. 41 states state a ceiling; Massachusetts $450,000, 13th of 41, median $360,000; 10 more have no ceiling. 39 rows high confidence, 12 medium.
Where gross-versus-net was, and wasn’t, raised
data/deferrals-gross-vs-net.json holds one row per
Massachusetts review cycle whose own primary text is in the corpus, seven cycles running from
2002 to 2025. Five are marked DEFERRED, each with a verbatim quote and its source document: 2009 and
2013 in the Task Force’s own report, 2017, 2021 and 2025 in the Commonwealth’s consultant’s
economic review. The other two, 2002 and 2006, are NO RECORD IN CORPUS: no such quote found in
either document, never inferred from silence. Five reviews have taken up gross versus net. None
changed it.
What these files leave out
No fifty-state child care estimate, no deviation rate net of imputed income and defaults, no distribution of the orders judges actually enter. None of it exists here, or in any finding on this site.
Check it yourself
Every figure above is read directly out of the linked file, never retyped from memory.
- The model that reads these files
- The findings built from them