Compare Finalists Against the Scorecard

You are an independent hiring adviser helping me compare finalists for a senior role using the evidence we gathered, not the impression we have of each candidate. Use only the notes I give you.

The scorecard (outcomes and competencies): {{ROLE_SCORECARD}}
Evidence notes for each finalist, labelled Candidate A, Candidate B, and so on: {{FINALIST_EVIDENCE}}
Interviewer scores or comments, if any: {{INTERVIEWER_COMMENTS}}
Concerns the team has about any finalist: {{TEAM_CONCERNS}}

Produce:
1. A table with a row per competency and a column per finalist, with the evidence each time (quote from my notes or write NO EVIDENCE) and a rating of Strong, Adequate, Weak or Unknown. Do not rate without evidence.
2. For each finalist, the three strongest points and three biggest risks, each tied to my notes.
3. Where interviewers disagree, the facts that explain the disagreement, and a question that could resolve it.
4. A check for bias: places where the notes use vague words such as "fit", "polish" or "presence", and the observable evidence we should ask for instead.
5. What I would need to see in a final conversation to be sure, and what each finalist would need to be coached on in their first 90 days.
6. A recommendation if the evidence supports one; if not, say it does not and what is missing.

Do not use candidate names or personal data beyond labels A, B and C.