What a “case” represents
In Mimas, a case is the working record for one matter. It holds the parties, the children, the schedule posture, the support orders, the income and expense inputs, and the scenarios you want to analyze. It is not just a folder name or a list of forms. It is the structured basis for calculation and review.
That distinction matters because the product is designed to keep the reasoning close to the result. If the case is structured clearly, later comparison and reporting stay coherent. If the case is assembled loosely, even correct numbers become harder to trust and harder to explain.
Key inputs
The first practical step is to create the matter and enter the basic record: parties, children, schedules, orders, income, deductions, expenses, and assumptions that may affect support analysis. You do not need every theoretical fact at once. You do need the facts that drive the first scenario you intend to review.
What matters first is the information that changes the posture of the run: incomes, timeshare structure, effective dates, and adjustments such as childcare or health insurance. What matters less at the beginning is decorative completeness. Mimas is most useful when the inputs that drive cause and effect are entered clearly enough to support comparison and review.
A good first case therefore starts with disciplined essentials, not with exhaustive ornament. If an input changes the support picture, it belongs in the record. If it does not yet affect the scenario you are testing, it can often wait until the next review pass.
If you need the underlying state context while setting up those inputs, the California Department of Child Support Services and California Courts remain the authoritative public references for child support process and guidance.
Understanding the result
The result is not only the support figure. The result is the whole calculation record: the inputs that drove it, the assumptions attached to it, the date context, the output posture, and the report or explanation that makes the number intelligible.
When you review a first case in Mimas, look for two things. First, ask whether the result is directionally plausible given the income and schedule picture. Second, ask whether the record explains itself well enough that someone else could understand what changed the outcome. That is where Mimas is meant to help. The software should reduce reconstruction, not require more of it.
Iterating scenarios
Scenario thinking is where Mimas becomes most useful. Once the first case is in place, you can revise a schedule, update income, change an effective date, or test a different set of assumptions without losing the baseline position. This is how you see cause and effect instead of merely producing a second unexplained number.
A practical first pass is to create the initial scenario, review the result, and then build one additional comparison scenario that changes a meaningful fact. That might be a revised timeshare, a different support date, or updated income. The comparison is often more informative than the first result by itself because it reveals what the matter is actually sensitive to.
If you can create the case, enter the inputs that materially drive support, review the result as a record rather than only a number, and then compare one alternate scenario, you are already using Mimas the right way.