That article by Dr Gunasekara is rather old, and seems to overlook (or perhaps precede) the establishment of, in particular, the Ajahn Chah Forest Monasteries in the West.
My experience in New Zealand of Theravada-oriented organisations has been with:
1. "Ethnic" (Thai and Sri Lankan) monasteries which primarily cater to their ethnic community, but do welcome Westerners (we have monks originally from Bangladesh and the USA in our Thai Wat).
2. "Western-oriented monasteries", specifically the Ajahn Chah lineage. These do get considerable support from the local Thai and Sri Lankan communities, but they are distinct from type 1.
3. "Secular Insight Meditation" along the lines of IMS in the USA and Gaya House in the UK.
Personally I prefer having my primary teachers from type1 or 2 organisations, but I do enjoy having some interaction with type 3 since different points of view are always helpful.
To answer another aspect, there are differences in detail between Sri Lankan, Thai, and Ajahn Chah Forest monestaries. The Dhamma is the same, but there are differences in form and accent in the chanting, and the "feel" of the communities is different.
Secular societies can be very different, and not necessarily what I would call "Theravada" or even "Buddhism". That's not an entirely negative statement. Many people can benefit from meditation in that context who would run screaming from an "Ethnic Monastery"...