Recently, I applied for credential verification from ICD and they claimed that I do not meet minimum required criteria. Interestingly, two of my other classmates with exactly same credentials got approval. This made me contact ICD credential analyst for further explanation and here is my experience.
ICD credential analyst tried her best to prove that she has not made any mistake, pointing at the documentation submitted by the University. Importantly, the University has a standard format of syllabus and credentials submission so there is NO room for error. ICD credential analyst tried to bring to my notice that all humans make mistake but she failed to understand that she herself can make a mistake and has made a mistake.As I was aware that couple of my other classmates who applied for the same verification and followed the same standard of syllabus & credentials got successful verification. I pointed this out to the analyst. It was very clear from her emails that she did not look at the other files I pointed her at, neither did she bother to go through my documentation again. Therefore from the credential evaluation point of view, I got a strong feeling that ICD does NOT have any standard yardstick for credential evaluation.
Additionally, ICD credential analyst failed to answer all the issues raised in the emails. When posed with 2 questions, related to the same file, only one question was answered and the other question was left unanswered. In my honest view, this is highly unprofessional method of handling email communication which I didn't expect from an agency like ICD.
When I tried to talk to credential analyst in person, I was told by the operator that an applicant can't talk to the credential analyst. On questioning the reason, I was informed that its a 'rule'. I don't really think that is satisfactory answer. It is totally weird that I can not talk to the analyst but I can write her an email when ICD does have a facility of recording the telephonic conversation.
I would like all future applicants to know that they may want to opt for other credential evaluating agency than ICD as they miserably failed to provide a professional and consistent service.
(Please feel free to repost this post in unedited form in other forums you may be aware of. All I want is to warn future applicants, nothing else...)

there must be another credentialing agency you can approach or a higher authority whom you can approach..