This is a excellent question--thanks for asking it. I have not explicitly defined the term "fundamentalist" in the article, but the answer is clarified by the "faith statements" and related material that I quote from the different "educational institutions" involved--in particular, the words that I put in bold in some of the quotes, e.g.: "the inerrancy of scripture"; "the Christian faith as it was originally conceived"; "the message of Jesus in its original setting"; "the original first-century Church ... to be followed literally as mandatory practice today"; opposition to "creedal formulations [that go] beyond the Bible itself," etc. The question, of course, is whether the term "evangelical" would be more appropriate. The lines are not always clear, but on account of the "foundational" nature of the various faith statements, I thought "fundamentalist" was the most accurate term.
At any rate, the involvement of these "Christian educational institutions" in archaeology and Dead Sea Scrolls research (already signaled as "fundamentalist" several years ago in the source I quote at the end of the article) should be viewed in light of the ongoing controversy surrounding efforts to raise money for Israel from evangelical Christians. There is a huge literature on this already, a quick google search brought up
this article and many others. I am not saying the efforts are wrong, I'm just pointing to the type of issues they raise. The question is always, is there some type of an ideological quid pro quo? In the case of the museum exhibit, this is even more clear, because of the total exclusion of scholars who disagree with the theory favored by Cargill and his associates.