Per The Washington Post at least 10 states come in above the $35,000 line per year in terms of welfare benefits packages (those include eg Massachusetts, Hawaii, Connecticut, NY, etc). The national median is near $28,800, again per the Washington Post (Michigan, Ohio and North Carolina are at that level).
CATO's numbers also match the Post's. They did a 2013 follow-up study to a prior 1995 study they did of work vs welfare trade-offs on a state by state basis. There is probably no more comprehensive source than their study, that I'm aware of.
"this study seeks to determine the approximate level of benefits that a typical welfare family, consisting of a single mother with two children, might receive"
These Cato ‘welfare package’ papers have been circulating for a long time and are misleading. Their calculations wind up being for a maximum amount of benefits someone could receive if their life circumstances happened to fit a multitude of criteria. In reality someone falling on hard times would only qualify for a small fraction of those amounts.
Here are two articles that dig into how the Cato numbers are technically possible but not useful for having a real dialogue about the benefits people wind up receiving in real life:
