As far as the differences in evaluations between the CAF and the MAF, I have an idea, but I don't really know how to word it without sounding like I'm shitting on my community.
Food for thought, though:
I think the pointy-nose types might tend to focus on things where it really counts. Let's face it. It does take a lot of skill and airmanship to lead a four-ship (or more) of Herks across a DZ, on-time and on-target, and then ensure a safe recovery to a possibly austere field, and then be asked to do it in any weather and most likely on NVGs, and maybe even with people shooting at you. Not discounting that. I will say though that, while I haven't done it before, it takes a couple more brain-bytes to safely put bombs and bullets on target while talking to multiple airborne and ground-based personnel and, all the while, traveling a lot faster and having to worry a lot more about gas than us Herk types, not to mention in the aforementioned conditions. Because of this, I think SEFEs in the MAF are more focused on what would be called "queep" in the CAF because they feel that kind of stuff needs to be focused on. I think the CAF guys by-in-large have a more demanding mission in most cases, and therefore, if they make everything in their profile happen but don't fly the perfect ILS on the RTB, then it isn't a big deal.
Will it ever change? I don't know, but it is what it is.
Personally, I've heard some guys on here talk about making an upgrade training folder bleed if necessary because that's where the training really counts, and to use checkrides as a gauge as to whether or not someone is basically qualified in their MWS for the next year or so. I liked that thought process, and it's one that I am going to try to lean towards.